Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Kentucky Vs. Graham

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 28, 1985

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

63 entries 10 linked 53 unlinked
Show
  1. Oklahoma City Vs. Tuttle US Supreme Court · Jun 03, 1985
  2. Pierson Vs. Ray US Supreme Court · Apr 11, 1967
  3. Harlow Vs. Fitzgerald US Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1982
  4. Wood Vs. Strickland US Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1975
  5. Hutto Vs. Finney US Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1978
  6. Brandon Vs. Holt US Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1985
  7. Scheuer Vs. Rhodes US Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1974
  8. Monroe Vs. Pape US Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1961
  9. Polk County Vs. Dodson US Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1981
  10. Quern Vs. Jordan US Supreme Court · Mar 05, 1979
  11. U.S. 159 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court Kentucky v. Graham
    Search
  12. U.S. 159 (1985) Kentucky v. Graham
    Search
  13. simply naming it as a defendant on the limited issue of fee liability. Pp. 473 U. S. 168 -170. (e) Hutto v. Finney
    Search
  14. In a short per curiam opinion relying solely on this Court's decision in Hutto v. Finney
    Search
  15. U. S. 678 (1978), the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed. Graham v. Wilson
    Search
  16. case requires us to unravel once again the distinctions between personal- and official-capacity suits, see Brandon v. Holt
    Search
  17. Supreme Court of Virginia v. Consumers
    Search
  18. Cf. Pulliam v. Allen
    Search
  19. impose personal liability upon a government official for actions he takes under color of state law. See, e.g., Scheuer v. Rhodes
    Search
  20. Monell v. New
    Search
  21. show that the official, acting under color of state law, caused the deprivation of a federal right. See, e.g., Monroe v. Pape
    Search
  22. behind the deprivation, Polk County v. Dodson
    Search
  23. immunity defenses, such Page 473 U. S. 167 as objectively reasonable reliance on existing law. See Imbler v. Pachtman
    Search
  24. U. S. 308 (1975) (same). In an official-capacity action, these defenses are unavailable. Owen v. City
    Search
  25. Brandon v. Holt
    Search
  26. prevailed against one party does not entitle him to fees from another party, let alone from a nonparty. Cf. Hensley v. Eckerhart
    Search
  27. Ford Motor Co. v. Department
    Search
  28. This bar remains in effect when state officials are sued for damages in their official capacity. Cory v. White
    Search
  29. IV Despite the Court of Appeals' contrary view, the result we reach today is fully consistent with Hutto v. Finney
    Search
  30. against a preexisting background of substantive liability rules. v. Only
    Search
  31. Berry v. McLemore
    Search
  32. Morrison v. Fox
    Search
  33. least one Court of Appeals appears to have reached the same result as that of the lower court in this case. See Glover v. Alabama
    Search
  34. to fees only where the suit was vexatious, frivolous, or brought to harass or embarrass the defendant. See Hensley v. Eckerhart
    Search
  35. We express no view as to the nature or degree of success necessary to make a plaintiff a prevailing party. See Maher v. Gagne
    Search
  36. from a municipality, Newport v. Fact
    Search
  37. Concerts, Inc., 453 U. S. 247 (1981), but are available in a suit against an official personally, see Smith v. Wade
    Search
  38. units can be sued directly for damages and injunctive or declaratory relief. See, e.g., Memphis Police Dept. v. Garner
    Search
  39. U. S. 1 (1985) (decided with Tennessee v. Garner
    Search
  40. has overridden it, however, a State cannot be sued directly in its own name regardless of the relief sought. Alabama v. Pugh
    Search
  41. in such cases typically will indicate the nature of the liability sought to be imposed. Brandon v. Holt
    Search
  42. was not intended to abrogate a State's Eleventh Amendment immunity. Quern v. Jordan
    Search
  43. the State's immunity can be overcome by naming state officials as defendants. See Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman
    Search
  44. to injunctive relief also is not barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Edelman v. Jordan
    Search
  45. U.S. Supreme Court Kentucky v. Graham
    Search
  46. Graham v. Wilson
    Search
  47. Supreme Court of Virginia v. Consumers
    Search
  48. See Imbler v. Pachtman
    Search
  49. Owen v. City
    Search
  50. Cf. Hensley v. Eckerhart
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial