Jones v. Bock

The Jones v. Bock Supreme Court decision dealt with litigation filed by prison inmates in regards to their treatment while they are in prison. The Prison Litigation Reform Act was passed by Congress in an attempt to reduce the amount of work that went to the federal courts from inmates filing suit against their captors. Under the PLRA, inmates have to go through several administrative channels, including both federal and state channels, before filing a civil rights suit. All of these potential remedies had to be completely exhausted before the case could go to court.

Under this act, the Sixth Court and some other lower made rules that helped enforce this exhaustion requirement. This helped screen trials before they made it to court. As a result, however, some inmates found it nearly impossible to get their cases heard in court. Jones v. Bock went to the Supreme Court in an appeal against these rules. The case asked whether the federal court had to dismiss an inmate's civil rights complaint if there was a failure to exhaust these administrative channels, even if there was only one unexhausted claim out there. It also asked whether the inmate had to name a defendant in this complaint under the PLRA. Finally, the case asked whether the PLRA's exhaustion requirement had to be documented and proven by the inmate, or by the defendant.

In Jones v. Bock, the Supreme Court granted certiorari. This means that it is now easier for prisoners to bring lawsuits to the courts. Inmates are still required to go through the existing prison grievance system. However, this unanimous Supreme Court decision eliminates the many loopholes put in place by the Circuit Courts that inmates used to have to go through before getting their cases heard. The ruling was delivered on January 22, 2007.

Click here to learn more about Kevin P. Simmons of Simmons, Jannace & Stagg