John L. Corrigan, Jr. v. City of Savage, Minnesota, et al.

This Court held in Heck u. Humphrey, 512 US 477 (1994) that an individual cannot bring a § 1983 r claim based on “actions whose unlawfulness would render a [prior] conviction or sentence invalid” unless he can “prove that the conviction Or sentence has been reversed” or otherwise invalidated. In Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1 (1998) five justices endorsed in dictum the view that Heck does not bar an individual not “in custody,” and therefore ineligible for habeas relief, from seeking damages under § 1983. The question presented is: Whether the court below erroneously held, in conflict with the decisions of seven other circuits, that the favorable termination rule applies even if an individual is no longer incarcerated, and therefore ineligible for habeas relief.