Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Decision Alert: Supreme Court Determines Legal Standard for Fourth Amendment Malicious Prosecution Claims

By Chantel Febus, James Azadian, Christopher Sakauye, Monika Harris, Puja R. Valera, A. Joseph Duffy IV & Dykema on July 18, 2024
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On June 20, 2024, the Supreme Court held (6-3) in Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon, Ohio that a plaintiff charged with a crime not supported by probable cause can prevail on a Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 even if he is charged with other crimes that are supported by probable cause. Justice Kagan delivered the majority opinion for the Court, vacating the Sixth Circuit’s decision and remanding the case.

As previously summarized in Dykema’s May 2024 edition, Jascha Chiaverini was charged with two misdemeanors and one felony related to allegedly purchasing stolen property. After spending four days in jail before the charges against him were dropped, he sued the police for malicious prosecution under the Fourth Amendment. Chiaverini argued that the police falsified evidence to support the felony charge. The district court dismissed his claim and the Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding that Chiaverini could not prevail because, even if there was no probable cause for the felony, there was probable cause for the two misdemeanors.

A majority of the Supreme Court disagreed. Following its 2022 decision in Thompson v. Clark, the Court determined that a plaintiff bringing a common-law malicious prosecution suit had to show that an official initiated a charge without probable cause, but not that every charge lacked an adequate basis. As a topper, Justice Kagan observed, “a funny thing happened on the way to this Court”—the government as amicus curiae and now the arresting officers agree that there is no categorical bar “when a baseless charge is accompanied by a valid charge.”

Justice Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Alito. They disagreed with the basic notion that a malicious prosecution claim can be brought under the Fourth Amendment. In a separate dissent, Justice Gorsuch echoed that sentiment, writing that he believed malicious prosecution claims should instead be brought under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

Takeaway

  • Probable cause for one charge does not bar a Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim for another, unsupported charge.

For more information, please contact Chantel Febus, James Azadian, Cory Webster, Christopher Sakauye, Monika Harris, Puja Valera, or A. Joseph Duffy, IV.

Photo of Chantel Febus Chantel Febus

Chantel Febus is a Member in Dykema’s Washington, D.C., Office and serves as the firm’s Head of East Coast Appeals. As a Member of the Appellate and Critical Motions, Business Litigation, and Government Investigations and Corporate Compliance practices, Chantel partners with clients to

…

Chantel Febus is a Member in Dykema’s Washington, D.C., Office and serves as the firm’s Head of East Coast Appeals. As a Member of the Appellate and Critical Motions, Business Litigation, and Government Investigations and Corporate Compliance practices, Chantel partners with clients to navigate novel legal issues and emergent legal challenges.

Read more about Chantel FebusEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of James Azadian James Azadian

James Azadian is a Member in Dykema’s Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., offices and serves as the firm’s West Coast Appellate Chair and co-leader of the nationwide Appellate and Critical Motions Practice. Jimmy specializes in complex federal and state court commercial litigation raising…

James Azadian is a Member in Dykema’s Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., offices and serves as the firm’s West Coast Appellate Chair and co-leader of the nationwide Appellate and Critical Motions Practice. Jimmy specializes in complex federal and state court commercial litigation raising cutting-edge and core business issues, the First Amendment to the Constitution, Article I of the California Constitution, and the application of California’s anti-SLAPP statute in federal court.

Read more about James AzadianEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Christopher Sakauye Christopher Sakauye

Chris Sakauye represents insurers in complex coverage matters. He is adept at assessing and applying current and developing trends in case law across all 50 states. His experience on a nationally recognized trial team also gives him unique insight into the pressure points…

Chris Sakauye represents insurers in complex coverage matters. He is adept at assessing and applying current and developing trends in case law across all 50 states. His experience on a nationally recognized trial team also gives him unique insight into the pressure points that bring difficult cases to quick and efficient resolutions.

Read more about Christopher SakauyeEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Monika Harris Monika Harris

Monika Harris is an associate at Dykema’s Chicago office who specializes in business litigation matters. Monika provides valuable advice primarily to clients in the manufacturing and insurance industries. In her practice, she advises clients on litigation strategies for a variety of matters including…

Monika Harris is an associate at Dykema’s Chicago office who specializes in business litigation matters. Monika provides valuable advice primarily to clients in the manufacturing and insurance industries. In her practice, she advises clients on litigation strategies for a variety of matters including breach of warranty, premises liability, consumer financial services, breach of contract, deceptive business practices, and tortious interference with business expectancy. Monika represents business clients in federal and state courts.

Read more about Monika HarrisEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of A. Joseph Duffy IV A. Joseph Duffy IV
Read more about A. Joseph Duffy IVEmail
  • Posted in:
    Appellate and Supreme Court, Criminal
  • Blog:
    Last Month at the Supreme Court
  • Organization:
    Dykema
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo