Timothy Booth v. C. O. Churner, et al. (532 U.S. 731)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 29, 2001 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 532 U.S. 731 · 121 S. Ct. 1819
- Decided
- May 29, 2001
- Term
- October Term 2000
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Souter
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the Court. The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 amended 42 U. S. C. § 1997e(a), which now requires a prisoner to exhaust “such administrative remedies as are available” before suing over prison conditions. The question is whether an inmate seeking only money damages must complete a prison administrative process that could provide some sort of relief on the eomplaint stated, but no money. We hold that he must. I Petitioner, Timothy Booth, was an inmate at the State Correctional Institution at Smithfield, Pennsylvania, when he began this action under Rev. Stat. §1979, 42 U. S. C. § 1983, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. He claimed that respondent corrections officers at Smithfield violated his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment by assaulting him, bruising his wrists in tightening and twisting handcuffs placed upon him, throwing cleaning material in his face, and denying him medical attention to treat ensuing injuries. Booth sought various forms of injunctive relief, including transfer to another prison, as well as several hundred thousand dollars in money damages. The Pennsylvania Department of Corrections provided an administrative grievance system at the time. It called for a written charge within 15 days of an event prompting an inmate’s complaint, which…
Excerpt of a 16,193-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.