1983 Case: What Damages and Relief Are Available?

Plaintiffs can ask for three different types of money damages through § 1983 cases: compensatory damages, punitive damages, and nominal damages. Carey v. Piphus (1978) 435 U.S. 247 (compensatory and nominal damages); Smith v. Wade (1983) 461 U.S. 30, 46, 103 S. Ct. 1625; 75 L. Ed. 2d 632] (holding that punitive damages can be awarded in § 1983 cases).  

Compensatory damages are intended to pay the plaintiff back for harm suffered.  This may include reimbursing money a plaintiff had to spend for medical expenses, making up for lost income, or compensating for physical or mental suffering. Memphis Community School Dist. v. Starhura (1986) 477 U.S. 299, 307, 106 S. Ct. 2537; 91 L. Ed. 2d 249; Borunda v. Richmond (9th Cir. 1989) 885 F. 2d 1384, 1389 (compensatory damages include attorneys' fees). 

An incarcerated person cannot receive compensatory damages for deprivation of a constitutional right unless some real injury or loss is proven. Carey, supra,  264; Raditch v. United States (9th Cir. 1991) 929 F.2d 478, 482, fn. 5; Memphis Community School Dist, supra, 308.  Moreover, incarcerated people cannot get compensatory damages for an emotional or mental injury suffered in custody unless there was also a physical injury. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e); see Zehner v. Trigg (7th Cir. 1997) 133 F. 3d 459, 461.  The requirement does not apply to suits filed by people who have been released on parole. Kerr v. Puckett (6th Cir. 1998) 138 F. 3d 321, 323.

People who owe restitution on their criminal cases should be aware that the state can take restitution payments out of a money damages award.

A person who wants to seek money damages, must sue the defendant in their individual capacity.  The person must state in the complaint what types and amounts of damages are being sought and must prove any facts necessary to support those claims.  Carey, supra, 250, 264.

Nominal damages are a symbolic statement that the plaintiff suffered a constitutional wrong, even though it caused no compensable harm. Carey, supra, 266-267; George v. City of Long Beach (9th Cir. 1992) 973 F. 2d 706, 708.  Nominal damages are usually awarded in the amount of $1 or some other small sum.  A person can win nominal damages without showing any actual injury or any physical injury. Smith, supra, 55-56; see also Oliver v. Keller (9th Cir. 2002) 289 F. 3d 623, 629-630 (PLRA physical injury requirement inapplicable to actions for punitive damages).

Plaintiffs can also seek declaratory relief in addition to or instead of money damages and/or an injunction.  People asking for declaratory relief do not have to show that they have suffered any physical injury. Davis v. District of Columbia (D.C. Cir. 1998) 158 F. 3d 1342, 1346.

Furthermore, plaintiffs can ask for injunctive relief in addition to or instead of money damages and/or declaratory relief.  Injunctive relief is a court order requiring prison officials to do (or not do) something.  People asking for injunctive relief do not have to show that they have suffered any physical injury. Davis, supra, 1346. 

However, a court can order injunctive relief only if the plaintiff faces a reasonable likelihood of suffering future irreparable harm. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons (1983) 461 U.S. 95, 112, 103 S. Ct. 1660; 75 L. Ed. 2d 675.  The likelihood that a constitutional right will be violated is sufficient. Elrod v. Burns (1976) 427 U.S. 347, 373, 96 S. Ct. 2673; 49 L. Ed. 2d 547.

A federal court's authority to issue an injunction is limited to correcting the constitutional violation, and cannot extend to requiring broader prison reforms. Toussaint v. McCarthy (9th Cir. 1986) 801 F. 2d 1080, 1087; Hoptowit v. Ray (9th Cir. 1982) 682 F. 2d 1237, 1246; Doty v. County of Lassen (9th Cir. 1994) 37 F. 3d 540, 543.  However, the parties can enter into settlement agreements with more specific provisions, and can be required to substantially comply with those agreements. See, e.g., Rouser v. White (9th Cir. 2016) 825 F. 3d 1076.

The Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PRLA”)  sets special limits on the courts’ powers to order injunctive relief in prison conditions cases.  For example, a court may grant injunctive relief only if the injunction is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the violation of the federal right, and is the least intrusive way to correct the violation.  The court also must take into consideration any impact the injunction might have on public safety or administration of the criminal justice system. 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a); see, e.g. Oluwa v. Gomez (9th Cir. 1998) 133 F. 3d 1237, 1239 (applies in cases filed prior to enactment of PLRA).

This requirement can be avoided if the parties enter into a settlement agreement that goes beyond the scope of the injunctive relief allowed by the PLRA. 18 U.S.C. § 3626(c).

There are two main types of injunctive relief: preliminary injunctive relief and permanent injunctive relief.  A plaintiff can ask for a preliminary injunction that will take effect while the § 1983 case is proceeding.  The court can grant a preliminary injunction if the plaintiff can show a likelihood of success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury if the court does not issue immediate relief, or if there are serious questions about the merits and the balance of hardships tips in the plaintiff's favor. Diamontiney v. Borg (9th Cir. 1990) 918 F. 2d 793, 795; Taylor v. Honig (9th Cir. 1990) 910 F. 2d 627, 631.

Generally, a court will not act on a request for preliminary relief that is simply included in the complaint.  Instead, the plaintiff must make a motion for a preliminary injunction pursuant to the federal rules of procedure and the local rules of court.  Under the PLRA, any preliminary injunctive relief terminates automatically after 90 days if the court does not act to make the injunction permanent. 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(2).

While this article appears on our website, it would be a mistake to give much credit to us for its content.  Credit instead is due to the Prison Law Office and their wonderful treatise, California Prison and Parole Law Handbook, from which much of the content in this article is from.  We thank the Prison Law Office.