Legal Opinion
Parratt v. Taylor
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided May 18, 1981No. 79-1734PublishedCited by 6,378 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Rehnquist
The respondent is an inmate at the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex who ordered by mail certain hobby materials valued at $23.50. The hobby materials were lost and respondent brought suit under 42 U. S. C. § 1983 to recover their value. At first blush one might well inquire why respondent brought an action in federal court to recover damages of such a small amount for negligent loss of property, but because 28 U. S. C. § 1343, the predicate for the jurisdiction of the United States District Court, contains no minimum dollar limitation, he was authorized by Congress to bring his action…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6,378 opinions
- West v. AtkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Daniels v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Jena Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department Al Olsen, Police Chief, Individually and as a Police AgentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- County of Sacramento v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
6,373 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.