Case law · Highest court · Federal

Preiser v. Rodriguez

Decided
May 7, 1973
Docket
71-1369
Status
Published
Jurisdiction
Federal

Cited 9,100 timesOverruled (not yet verified)Possible negative treatment: overruled, overruled in part on other grounds, overruled on other grounds (not yet verified) · Deters v. Collins

What later courts said

Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.

How the opinion begins

Mr. Justice Stewart delivered the opinion of the Court.

The respondents in this case were state prisoners who were deprived of good-conduct-time credits by the New York State Department of Correctional Services as a result of disciplinary proceedings. They then brought actions in a federal district court, pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U. S. C. § 1983. Alleging that the Department had acted unconstitutionally in depriving them of the credits, they sought injunctive relief to compel restoration of the credits, which in each case would result in their immediate release from confinement in [*477] prison. The question before us is whether state prisoners seeking such redress may obtain equitable relief under the Civil Rights Act, even though the federal habeas corpus statute, 28 U. S. C. § 2254, clearly provides a specific federal remedy.

The question is of considerable practical importance. For if a remedy under the Civil Rights Act is available, a plaintiff need not first seek redress in a state forum. Monroe v. Pape, 365 U. S. 167, 183 (1961); McNeese v. Board of Education, 373 U. S. 668, 671 (1963); Damico v. California, 389 U. S. 416 (1967); King v. Smith, 392 U. S. 309, 312 n. 4 (1968); Houghton v. Shafer, 392 U. S. 639 (1968). If, on the other hand, habeas corpus is the exclusive federal remedy in these circumstances, then a plaintiff cannot seek the intervention of a federal court until he has first sought and been denied relief in the state courts, if a state remedy is available and adequate. 28 U. S. C. §2254 (b).

Statutes cited

Cite this

Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (1973)

Read the full opinion

Free account needed

Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.