Case Citator › Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla.

Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla.

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

Superseded by statute
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
457 U.S. 496
Decided
Confirmed treatments
4
Flagged citations read
100 of 100
Citing cases (total)
100
Treatment dates
1983–2009
Superseded by statute
A reviewed court treats this case as superseded by later legislation. Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla. has been superseded by statute for prisoner suits about prison life. All 100 flagged citations have been read; four confirmed treatments are listed below.
More on how this was screened

Congress later required prisoners to exhaust administrative remedies for suits about prison life, while Patsy's general rule against exhaustion for § 1983 claims remains in force.

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.

100 later cases cite Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla.; 100 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 Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla.?

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

Superseded by statute

  • The Supreme Court held that the Prison Litigation Reform Act carves prisoner suits about prison life out of Patsy's general rule against administrative exhaustion.

    Porter v. Nussle · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    Ordinarily, plaintiffs pursuing civil rights claims under 42 U. S. C. § 1983 need not exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit in court. See Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla., 457 U. S. 496, 516 (1982). Prisoner suits alleging constitutional deprivations while incarcerated once fell within this general rule. ... For the reasons stated, we hold that the PLRA’s exhaustion requirement applies to all inmate suits about prison life, whether they involve general circumstances or particular episodes, and whether they allege excessive force or some other wrong.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Limited

  • The Eighth Circuit recognized an exception to Patsy's general rule for some procedural-due-process claims, while holding that postdeprivation remedies need not be exhausted when the plaintiff claims a right to predeprivation process.

    Keating v. Nebraska Public Power District · Eighth Circuit · filed

    We have recognized an exception to Patsy’s general rule that exhaustion of state remedies prior to bringing a section 1983 claim is not required. ‘Under federal law, a litigant asserting a deprivation of procedural due process must exhaust state remedies before such an allegation states a claim under § 1983.’ Wax ’n Works v. City of St. Paul, 213 F.3d 1016, 1019 (8th Cir.2000) (emphasis added). However, it is not necessary for a litigant to have exhausted available postdeprivation remedies when the litigant contends that he was entitled to predeprivation process.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Questioned

  • The Sixth Circuit questioned whether Patsy could be reconciled with Fair Assessment and read Patsy as leaving room for future exceptions, although it declined to create one in the cases before it.

    Loudermill v. Cleveland Board of Education · Sixth Circuit · filed

    We note that the Patsy decision is not easily reconcilable with the Court’s earlier decision in Fair Assessment in Real Estate Association, Inc. v. McNary, 454 U.S. 100 (1981), where the Court left open the possibility of exceptions to the no-exhaustion requirement. See The Supreme Court, 1981 Term, 96 Harv.L.Rev. 62, 207-17 (1982). While we believe that Patsy has not precluded the possibility of fashioning future exceptions to the no-exhaustion rule, we find that such an exception would be inappropriate in the instant cases where appellants exhausted their administrative remedies.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

  • The Tenth Circuit questioned the continued vitality of Patsy's statement that Eleventh Amendment immunity need not be raised sua sponte after Pennhurst described a mandatory jurisdictional inquiry.

    Mascheroni v. Board of Regents of the University of California · Tenth Circuit · filed

    Because the Supreme Court’s subsequent opinion in Pennhurst did not expressly overrule Patsy, the continued vitality of the permissive rule remains uncertain.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla. 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