| 词条 | Parratt v. Taylor |
| 释义 |
|Litigants=Parratt v. Taylor |ArgueDate=March 2 |ArgueYear=1981 |DecideDate=May 18 |DecideYear=1981 |FullName=Parratt, et al. v. Taylor |USVol=451 |USPage=527 |ParallelCitations=101 S. Ct. 1908; 68 L. Ed. 2d 420; 1981 U.S. LEXIS 99; 49 U.S.L.W. 4509 |Prior= |Subsequent= |Holding=Procedural due process guarantees only a post-deprivation hearing, provision of a right to sue in state court was provision of that hearing. |SCOTUS=1975-1981 |Majority=Rehnquist |JoinMajority=Burger, Brennan, Stewart, White, Blackmun, Stevens |Concurrence=Stewart |Concurrence2=White |Concurrence3=Blackmun |Concurrence4=Powell |Concurrence/Dissent=Marshall |LawsApplied= |Overruled=Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327 (1986) }} Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527 (1981), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court, in which the court considered the applicability of Due Process to a claim brought under Section 1983. BackgroundThe respondent was an inmate at the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex who had ordered hobby materials by mail. When the hobby materials were lost, he brought suit under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 to recover their value, $23.50.{{citation needed|date=June 2017}} Opinion of the CourtThe Court held that when procedural due process guarantees only a post-deprivation hearing, provision of a right to sue in state court was provision of that hearing. The Court found that the deprivation did not occur as the result of some established state procedure, but as the result of the unauthorized failure of state agents to follow established state procedure, and because Nebraska had a tort claims procedure that provided a remedy to persons who had suffered a tortious loss at the hands of the State, but which respondent did not use, such procedure could have fully compensated respondent for his property loss and were sufficient to satisfy the requirements of due process. The Court found that although the respondent was deprived of property under color of state law, he had not sufficiently alleged a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court also held that a merely negligent deprivation of property under color of state law was actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This holding was overruled by Daniels v. Williams in 1986, which held that a 1983 action only lies for an intentional deprivation of rights. External links
| case = Parratt v. Taylor, {{Ussc|451|527|1981|el=no}} | justia =https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/451/527/ | loc =http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep451/usrep451527/usrep451527.pdf | oyez =https://www.oyez.org/cases/1980/79-1734{{SCOTUS-case-stub}} 6 : United States Supreme Court cases|1981 in United States case law|Overruled United States Supreme Court decisions|United States Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court|Due Process Clause|United States criminal due process case law |
| 随便看 |
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。