Rhodes v. Stewart

Background

Two prisoners, Albert Reese and Larry Stewart, sued Ohio prison officials on January 17, 1978, saying they were wrongly denied permission to subscribe to a magazine. The District Court later ruled the prison had applied improper procedures and on April 2, 1981 ordered compliance and awarded the lawyers $5,306.25. Earlier appellate rulings and a remand are part of the record. Unnoticed in the early orders were two facts: Reese died on February 18, 1979, and Stewart was paroled on March 15, 1978 and finally released January 17, 1980, so neither plaintiff was in custody when the District Court issued its judgment.

Reasoning

The core question was whether a plaintiff who is released or dead before judgment can be a “prevailing party” entitled to attorney’s fees under §1988. The Court relied on its earlier decision in Hewitt v. Helms and explained that a judicial decision counts as relief only if it produces a real change in the defendant’s behavior toward the plaintiff. Because any change in prison policy could not benefit a deceased plaintiff or a former prisoner, the judgment produced no practical relief. The Court concluded the plaintiffs did not prevail and reversed the fee award.

Real world impact

The decision prevents fee awards in similar cases where the lawsuit becomes moot before judgment and where the judgment does not change the defendant’s behavior toward the individual plaintiff. Civil-rights lawyers seeking fees after challenges to prison rules will face limits when plaintiffs are released or die before relief is implemented. The ruling resolves the fee question on these facts without full briefing on broader legal issues.

Dissents or concurrances

Justices Marshall, Blackmun, and Brennan dissented, criticizing the Court’s summary reversal practice and arguing that obtaining a formal judgment should count as a win even if the practical benefit was absent.