Supreme Court· 3/4/1992

McCarthy v. Madigan

Citations

503 U.S. 140
112 S. Ct. 1081
117 L. Ed. 2d 291
1992 U.S. LEXIS 1524

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that where Congress has specifically mandated exhaustion of administrative remedies as a prerequisite to suit, such exhaustion is required
holding that federal prisoners need not exhaust their administrative remedies before filing suit in federal court
holding that bias and predetermination of the issues justify an exception to the exhaustion doctrine
holding that “[e]xhaustion is required because it serves the twin purposes of protecting administrative agency authority and promoting judicial efficiency”
holding that a prisoner was not required to exhaust the Bureau of Prisons’ administrative procedure before making a Bivens claim for money damages
recognizing that Congress had not intended general inmate grievance procedures to impose exhaustion requirement on Bivens actions when the procedures did not address harms raised or remedies provided by Bivens action

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Blackmun, White, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

766 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

36 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named McCarthy v. Madigan

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.