When Mud Becomes Muck. Supreme Court Refuses to Answer Question Upon Which Cert was Granted – Whether and How an Underlying Malicious Prosecution Claim Can Be Brought as a Constitutional Tort Under 42 U.S.C. 1983 – and Instead Answers Another Question, Unclearly, When Does a Fourth Amendment Claim for Unreasonable Seizure “Accrue” Under State Law Statute of Limitations?

Noting a split of authority among the Circuit Courts as to whether a “malicious prosecution” claim is even cognizable under 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, and if so, what “constitutional right” is it tethered to, the Supreme Court granted certiorari ostensibly to resolve that issue in Manuel v Joliet.

However, as can be seen from the opinion itself, the majority goes on to evade that question, and issue a ruling concerning the accrual date of a more generic cause of action (unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment).

Justice Alito criticizes the majority’s sidestepping of the primary issue and points out that the “question” upon which certiorari was granted is still open among the Circuits, and could even still be left unanswered after the conclusion of this case below.

A more in-depth summary is forthcoming.

Law Offices of Carson J. Tucker has argued and won significant cases in the United States Circuit Courts and federal district courts on 42 USC 1983 liability in a variety of contexts

Most recently, Mr. Tucker filed a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court in a 42 USC 1983 case against a county law enforcement agency.

On March 1, 2017, Mr. Tucker presented a webinar to the International Municipal Lawyers Association (IMLA) on several pending issues among the Circuit Courts and his petition in the United States Supreme Court concerning 42 USC 1983 claims. Outline of 42 USC 1983 Webinar on 42 USC 1983 Claims

Mr. Tucker has developed a particular expertise in prosecuting and defending appeals in the United States Supreme Court and has had several significant successes in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Michigan Supreme Court and the Michigan Court of Appeals. In addition to his work on appeals, Mr. Tucker has written brief amicus curiae in the United States Supreme Court and Michigan Supreme Court for various governmental and non-governmental entities. In addition to being licensed to practice in Michigan, Mr. Tucker is admitted to practice in the Eastern and Western District Federal Courts in Michigan, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s