State Court Action

Part 3: 42 U.S.C. §1983 Lawsuits

One of the best dynamics of a 42 U.S.C. §1983 lawsuit is that it can be brought IN EITHER federal OR state courts.

A main reason to bring a Section 1983 claim in state court (as opposed to federal court) is because of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). See 42 U.S.C. §1997e. The PLRA is a federal law that makes it EXTREMELY difficult for prisoners to file federal lawsuits by setting up all types of procedural roadblocks and statutory requirements. Lo-and-behold, the State of Washington has followed Big Brother Government and enacted a similar state law to impose virtually the same procedural roadblocks and statutory requirements for the ''three-strikes'' provisions of the PLRA. See RCW 4.24.430. As such, trying to avoiding the PLRA's ''three-strike'' ridiculousness is not a good reason to file a Section 1983 lawsuit in state court.

What IS a good thing about filing a Section 1983 lawsuit in state court is that you're able to bring a suit to enforce all rights that are available under state law but not available exclusively in federal court. That is to say, a state ''tort'' or claim is another way to try to enforce rights protected under state law but not federal law. A tort against prison officials under Washington law is authorized by statute: RCW 4.92.090 through .130. The main advantage of bringing a Section 1983 lawsuit in state court is that some of the actions of prison staff might be considered a tort or claim under state law but might not be considered a violation of federal law. You can file state and federal claims under Section 1983 if the action you're suing about violates both state and federal law; you cannot use Section 1983 to file a lawsuit for an action that ONLY violates state law.

For instance: if a prisoner's outgoing mail was ripped up and thrown away by prison staff because it said that one of the prison staff is overweight, that action violates the First Amendment right for prisoners to communicate by mail (see, e.g. Bressman v. Farrier 825 F.Supp. 231 (N.D. Iowa 1993)), and it could ALSO constitute a state tort of outrage. By filing in state court, you could bring a claim for the prison staff violating the First Amendment AND also for the tort of outrage. By coupling the claims which a state court has jurisdiction over together with claims under Section 1983, there could potentially be better resolution of the outcome of the case.

That's not to say that you absolutely can't file state claims directly in federal courts, because in certain situations you can. The federal courts have a special jurisdiction called ''Supplemental Jurisdiction'' whereby they are specifically authorized to hear state law claims if the state law claims arose from the same acts, actions, or omissions as those which the federal claims are based. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367. If your main claim for filing in federal court is a constitutional violation, any state laws which are also violated by the same acts, actions, or omissions are allowed in the federal courts and can be heard and determined on their merits.