Why a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Case is Often Dismissed

Unfortunately, the public is enamored of prisoners winning thousands, if not millions, of dollars after being “mistreated” or “discriminated against” in jail or prison.  It is David versus Goliath with the added layer of the criminal being enriched while most vulnerable in custody.  Some such actions are class actions, vindicating the important constitutional rights of dozens, if not hundreds of inmates.  Such victories are glamorous and celebrated.

There can be no doubt that many prisoners endure illegal conduct from prison or jail employees or suffer due to procedures that allow injuries or, some may say, promote such injuries.

However, the sad reality is that such victories are extremely difficult in federal court.  Indeed, in most civil rights lawsuits, the person never wins any relief.  In many cases, there is never even a decision on the merits of the case.  One reason a § 1983 lawsuit may fail is because the case did not meet the requirements for such actions.  Too often, a person who is upset by an unjust act or policy will file a civil rights complaint in pro per, naively believing justice will prevail, without realistically evaluating the merits of the case. 

To avoid this, before filing a complaint, a person should review the elements of a civil rights action, as well as the prison officials’ possible defenses, to determine if they have any chance of proving a claim for relief.  

Another reason for the high dismissal rate of lawsuits is that in many cases people do not pursue the case after mailing the initial complaint to the court.  They may expect a quick settlement offer and this is not issued.  Section 1983 lawsuits are civil cases governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the local rules of the district court.  This means the person, as the plaintiff, must follow certain procedures to bring the case to trial, which the plaintiff often does not do.  Consequently, each year, many § 1983 lawsuits filed by people in prison are dismissed for “failure to prosecute” because the person did not bring the case to trial in a timely manner. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 41(b). A court may not dismiss under this rule simply because a plaintiff does not appear on the date set for trial unless alternatives have been explored. See Hernandez v. Whiting (9th Cir. 1989) 881 F. 2d 768, 771-772.  

The court will expect a person representing themselves (pro se) to follow all applicable rules, including local rules of court and any other orders that the court issues. See, e.g., King v. Atiyeh (9th Cir. 1986) 814 F. 2d 565, 567.  Each district court should provide a copy of the local rules of court upon request. 

The court will not help the person in prison prepare or investigate a case.  Nor will it assist with the task of serving the defendants or their lawyer with a copy of every document that the person files with the court.  However, even though a court will not help a pro se plaintiff litigate a case, it may act to enforce a person’s right of access to the courts if prison officials have unreasonably interfered with the person’s research, investigation, or other actions necessary to pursue a lawsuit.

However, sometimes a person with a meritorious case will be unable to find an attorney and will have to file on their own.  People who want to bring such lawsuits should seek additional resources, such as any one or all of these five:

While this article appears on our website, credit for its main point and most of the content must be given to the Prison Law Office and their great treatise, California Prison and Parole Law Handbook, not us.