Skip to main content
Article
No Cure for a Broken Heart
Yale Law Journal
  • Daniel J. Sharfstein
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-1-1998
Keywords
  • privacy law,
  • civil law,
  • prisoner litigation
Abstract

Davis filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit pro se for the violation of his constitutional right to privacy, seeking $1.5 million in compensatory and punitive damages. The district court dismissed the claim sua sponte, relying on a section of the newly enacted Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), entitled "Limitation on Recovery": "No Federal civil action may be brought by a prisoner confined in a jail, prison, or other correctional facility, for mental or emotional injury suffered while in custody without a prior showing of physical injury." Davis challenged this physical injury requirement on equal protection grounds, but in "Davis v. District of Columbia" the D.C. Circuit held that there is no cure for a broken heart...The court upheld the physical injury requirement as being rationally related to the government's interest in "cutting back meritless prisoner litigation," and Davis's claim was dismissed with prejudice.

Citation Information
Daniel J. Sharfstein. "No Cure for a Broken Heart" Yale Law Journal Vol. 108 (1998) p. 2451 ISSN: 0044-0094
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/daniel-sharfstein/3/