Booth v. Churner
- Decided
- May 29, 2001
- Docket
- 99-1964
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 3,581 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that exhaustion is required even where the relief sought is not available in the administrative process — Calhoun v. Department of Justice (2010)
- holding that exhaustion is required under the PLRA even if the plaintiff seeks only money damages and money damages are not available as relief — Indelicato v. Suarez (2002)
- holding that § 1997e(a) requires a § 1983 prisoner-plaintiff to exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit, even when only requesting monetary damages — Roberts v. Barreras (2004)
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
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 [*734] “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
Statutes cited
Cite this
Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731 (2001)Read the full opinion
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.