Dawkins v. Huffman

25 F. App'x 107
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedDecember 18, 2001
Docket01-7174
StatusUnpublished

This text of 25 F. App'x 107 (Dawkins v. Huffman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dawkins v. Huffman, 25 F. App'x 107 (4th Cir. 2001).

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

James Edward Dawkins appeals the district court’s order entering judgment on the jury’s verdict finding a violation of Dawkins’ Fourth Amendment rights but nonetheless declining to award damages in this 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) action. Among other claims of error, Dawkins contends on appeal that the district court erred in failing to award nominal damages. The Supreme Court’s decision in Carey v. Piphus, 435 U.S. 247, 267, 98 S.Ct. 1042, 55 L.Ed.2d 252 (1978), “obligates a court to award nominal damages when a plaintiff establishes the violation of [a constitutional right] but cannot prove actual injury.” Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. 103, 112, 113 S.Ct. 566, 121 L.Ed.2d 494 (1992). Accordingly, we will vacate that portion of the district court’s judgment that denies any monetary relief and remand for entry of an award of nominal damages not to exceed $1.00. See Norwood v. Bain, 166 F.3d 243, 245 (4th Cir. 1999) (en banc). In all other respects, we affirm the district court’s entry of judgment. See Dawkins v. Huffman, No. CA-97-171-5-4-MU (W.D.N.C. June 5, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before *108 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Carey v. Piphus
435 U.S. 247 (Supreme Court, 1978)
Farrar v. Hobby
506 U.S. 103 (Supreme Court, 1992)
Norwood v. Bain
166 F.3d 243 (Fourth Circuit, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 F. App'x 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dawkins-v-huffman-ca4-2001.