14-F-3. What is Physical Injury?
Prisoners must show physical injury in order to recover damages for mental or emotional injury under 1997e(e)476, but courts have not fully explained what it takes to show physical injury. The injury "must be more than de minimis, but need not be significant."477 A "de minimis" injury is one where the harm is very small. However, courts disagree over what kinds of injuries exceed the de minimis threshold. One appeals court has said that injury does not need to be observable or diagnosable, or require treatment by a medical care professional, to meet the Section 1997e(e) standard.478 But a much-cited district court decision holds that, under Section 1997e(e):
A physical injury is an observable or diagnosable medical condition requiring treatment by a medical care professional. It is not a sore muscle, an aching back, a scratch, an abrasion, a bruise, etc., which lasts even up to two or three weeks. . . . [It is] more than the types and kinds of bruises and abrasions about which the Plaintiff complains. Injuries treatable at home and with over-the-counter drugs, heating pads, rest, etc., do not fall within the parameters of 1997e(e). 479
Not surprisingly, several courts have dismissed identifiable painful injuries as de minimis.480 But others have found somewhat small injuries to be actionable under section 1997e(e).481
Several courts have held that the physical results of emotional distress do not qualify as physical injuries under this statute.482 Courts are split on the question of whether the risk of future injury meets the standard.483 Courts are also split over how closely your physical injury must be connected with a mental or emotional injury for you to recover damages for the mental or emotional injury.484
A mixture of injuries short of visible damage to body parts have been held to satisfy Section 1997e(e). Most courts (but not all) have held that sexual assault is a physical injury.485 Other injuries that at least some courts have held satisfy the physical injury requirement include: physical disturbances resulting from medication withdrawal, overdose, or error;486 the consequences of failing to treat an illness or injury, both the immediate consequences487 and longer-term or future issues;488 denial of enough food;489 food contamination or poisoning;490 denial of exercise;491 physical disturbances resulting from exposure to harmful materials;492 infliction of pain or illness through extreme conditions of confinement,493 physical abuse,494 or denial of medical care;495 and stillbirth or miscarriage.496 However, there are many cases that seem to involve similar or equally serious conditions, but that courts have held do not satisfy the PLRA's physical injury requirement.497 For example, some courts have stated that the alleged infliction of severe physical pain does not satisfy the statute.498 Even outright torture might not meet the requirement as long as it is done with enough care to leave no marks.499 In addition, some courts have also dismissed small visible bodily injuries as de minimis.500
It is hard to know exactly what satisfies the physical injury requirement of the PLRA because most court decisions do not specifically define what "physical injury" means, other than "more than de minimis." One exception is a district court decision that cited dictionary definitions of "physical" and "injury."501 The district court found "physical" to mean "of or relating to the body," and "injury" to mean "an act that damages, harms, or hurts; an unjust or undeserved infliction of suffering or harm."502 The court held that a reasonable jury could find that the statute was satisfied by exposure to noxious odors, including those of human wastes, and "dreadful" conditions of confinement (including inability to keep clean while menstruating, denial of clothing except for a paper gown, and exposure to ogling (staring) by male prison staff and construction workers).503 This district court case gives a broad interpretation of the language of the statute, and other courts have not given any alternative approach that is helpful in assessing difficult cases. You should note, though, that this opinion was unpublished, which means it may carry less weight.
There may be a solution to the lack of clarity in defining physical injury under the PLRA. Another federal statute, 18 U.S.C. §242, makes it a crime for someone acting under color of state law to deprive another person of his or her federal civil rights.504 Section 242 requires a showing of "bodily injury," but the statute does not define "bodily injury."505 However, several other federal criminal statutes define "bodily injury" as meaning: "(A) a cut, abrasion, bruise, burn, or disfigurement; (B) physical pain; (C) illness; (D) impairment of a function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty; or (E) any other injury to the body, no matter how temporary."506 This definition of "bodily injury," found in other federal statues, could also be applied in Section 1997e(e).507 As far as we know, no court has yet considered this idea. If you are faced with a claim that your injury isn't severe enough to satisfy the PLRA, but it falls within the statutory definition of bodily injury, you could highlight the definition of "bodily injury" in 18 U.S.C. §§831(f)(5), 1365(g)(4), 1515(a)(5), and 1864(d)(2), and argue that there is no difference between "bodily injury" and "physical injury" under the PLRA.
476. 42 U.S.C. §1997e(e) (2012).
477. Siglar v. Hightower, 112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997).
478. Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623, 628 (9th Cir. 2002); see also Mansoori v. Shaw, No. 99 C 6155, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11670, at *11 (N.D...
