Case Citator › Preiser v. Rodriguez

Preiser v. Rodriguez

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Criticized by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
411 U.S. 475
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
300 of 300
Citing cases (total)
9,099
Treatment dates
1994
Criticized by some courts
At least one reviewed court has criticized this case’s reasoning. No reviewed court has overruled it. Preiser v. Rodriguez is criticized; all 300 flagged citations have been read. The 1 confirmed adverse treatment is listed below.
Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

9,099 later cases cite Preiser v. Rodriguez; 300 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Preiser v. Rodriguez?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Criticized

  • The Court criticized as unreliable and potentially unintelligible Preiser's dictum suggesting that a state prisoner seeking only damages could always proceed under § 1983, then held that necessarily-invalidating damages claims are not cognizable without favorable termination.

    Heck v. Humphrey · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    In dictum, however, Preiser asserted that since a state prisoner seeking only damages “is attacking something other than the fact or length of ... confinement, and ... is seeking something other than immediate or more speedy release[,] ... a damages action by a state prisoner could be brought under [§ 1983] in federal court without any requirement of prior exhaustion of state remedies.” ... That statement may not be true, however, when establishing the basis for the damages claim necessarily demonstrates the invalidity of the conviction. ... In the last analysis, we think the dicta of Preiser to be an unreliable, if not an unintelligible, guide: that opinion had no cause to address, and did not carefully consider, the damages question before us today.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Preiser v. Rodriguez and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace