Samiksha Jaiswal (Editor)

Correctional Services Corp. v. Malesko

Updated on
Edit
Like
Comment
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Reddit
Citations
  
534 U.S. 61 (more)

End date
  
2001

Full case name
  
Correctional Services Corporation v. Malesko

Majority
  
Rehnquist, joined by O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas

Concurrence
  
Scalia, joined by Thomas

Dissent
  
Stevens, joined by Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer

Ruling court
  
Supreme Court of the United States

Similar
  
Bivens v Six Unknown, Sosa v Alvarez‑Machain, Ashcroft v Iqbal, Ricci v DeStefano, Boumediene v Bush

Correctional Services Corporation v. Malesko, 534 U.S. 61 (2001), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court, in which the Court found that implied damages actions first recognized in Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) should not be extended to allow recovery against a private corporation operating a halfway house under contract with the Bureau of Prisons.

A Bivens action is a civil rights violation suit against the government. The Supreme Court limited this court-invented private right of action to exclude corporate defendants like Correctional Services Corporation. Plaintiff's actions against the individual employees were barred by the statute of limitations because the names of the John Doe defendant prison guards (esp. Jorge Urena) were not known to the plaintiff.

References

Correctional Services Corp. v. Malesko Wikipedia