Case Citator › Darryl McGore v. Gene L. Wrigglesworth, Chief Sheriff Richard Chinelli, Administrator Ingham County Sheriff's Department

Darryl McGore v. Gene L. Wrigglesworth, Chief Sheriff Richard Chinelli, Administrator Ingham County Sheriff's Department

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

Overruled in part
Court
Sixth Circuit
Citation
114 F.3d 601
Decided
Confirmed treatments
4
Flagged citations read
2,220 of 2,220
Citing cases (total)
5,495
Treatment dates
1998–2013
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. McGore v. Wrigglesworth has been overruled in part: all 2,220 flagged citations have been read, with the 4 confirmed treatments listed below. Jones v. Bock displaced McGore's role in the Sixth Circuit's dismissal-and-refiling rule for mixed exhausted and unexhausted complaints, and Wayne LaFountain v. Shirlee Harry expressly overruled McGore's broader no-amendment rule for complaints subject to PLRA dismissal.
More on how this was screened

Geoffrey Benson v. Greg O'Brian confined McGore's non-IFP screening observations to dicta, while Losee v. Maschner declined its collection-day balance interpretation. The other reviewed opinions applied McGore's surviving filing-fee and screening rules, reported the acts of Jones or LaFountain, or placed nearby adverse language on unrelated authority. Duplicate records of the same opinion were read and counted separately but do not create duplicate treatments.

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.

5,495 later cases cite Darryl McGore v. Gene L. Wrigglesworth, Chief Sheriff Richard Chinelli, Administrator Ingham County Sheriff's Department; 2,220 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 Darryl McGore v. Gene L. Wrigglesworth, Chief Sheriff Richard Chinelli, Administrator Ingham County Sheriff's Department?

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

Overruled in Part

  • The Sixth Circuit overruled McGore's rule that a district court may not grant leave to amend a complaint subject to dismissal under the PLRA, holding that Rule 15(a) permits amendment.

    Wayne LaFountain v. Shirlee Harry · Sixth Circuit · filed

    The PLRA’s screening requirements—28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1) & 1915(e)(2)(B); 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c)(1)—say nothing about whether a district court can allow a prisoner to amend his complaint. Thus, McGore is flatly inconsistent with Jones. We therefore overrule McGore; and we hold, like every other circuit to have reached the issue, that under Rule 15(a) a district court can allow a plaintiff to amend his complaint even when the complaint is subject to dismissal under the PLRA.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Abrogated

  • The Supreme Court displaced McGore's role in the Sixth Circuit's rule requiring dismissal and refiling of mixed exhausted and unexhausted complaints, holding that courts should dismiss only the bad claims and proceed with the good.

    Jones v. Bock · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    Among circuits requiring total exhaustion there is further disagreement over what to do if the requirement is not met. ... the Sixth Circuit denies leave to amend, dismisses the action, and requires that it be filed anew ... See also McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F. 3d 601, 612 (1997). ... As a general matter, if a complaint contains both good and bad claims, the court proceeds with the good and leaves the bad. “[O]nly the bad claims are dismissed; the complaint as a whole is not.”
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Declined to Follow

  • The court declined to adopt McGore's collection-day balance rule because it found McGore unpersuasive on that interpretation of the PLRA.

    Losee v. Maschner · S.D. Iowa · filed

    The Sixth Circuit stated a prison could not collect a filing-fee payment under § 1915(b)(2) when an inmate’s account balance was under $10, but the court did not explain its basis for this conclusion. ... The Court does not find in McGore a persuasive reason for adopting Losee’s proposed interpretation in this case that the PLRA requires the balance in an inmate account to exceed $10 on collection day. ... For these reasons, the Court finds the PLRA’s requirements are satisfied if at anytime during the month, the amount in the account exceeds $10; the amount in the account does not have to exceed $10 on a collection day.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Limited

  • The citing court limited McGore by treating its observations on screening non-in-forma-pauperis actions as dicta and holding that § 1915(e)(2) applies only to in-forma-pauperis proceedings.

    Geoffrey Benson v. Greg O'Brian · Sixth Circuit · filed

    Thus, it was unnecessary for us to decide in McGore whether actions that are not pursued in forma pauperis are to be screened under § 1915(e)(2), and any observations made by the McGore court on this issue are dicta.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Darryl McGore v. Gene L. Wrigglesworth, Chief Sheriff Richard Chinelli, Administrator Ingham County Sheriff's Department 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