Jago v. Van Curen
454 U.S. 14 · Decided November 9, 1981 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Jago v. Van Curen was decided on November 9, 1981 by a vote of 6–3. The Court reversed the lower court's decision. The decision was issued per curiam (an unsigned opinion of the Court). SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, prisoners' and defendants' rights” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 454 U.S. 14 · 102 S. Ct. 31 · 70 L. Ed. 2d 13 · 1981 U.S. LEXIS 141
- Docket number
- 80-1942
- Decided
- November 9, 1981
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Per curiam (no oral argument)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–3
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, prisoners' and defendants' rights
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Dissent | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority |
Full case caption
Jago, Former Superintendent, Southern Ohio Correctional Facility, et al. v. Van Curen
SCDB identifiers: case 1981-003, docket 1981-003-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, prisoners' and defendants' rights”
- Connecticut Board of Pardons v. Dumschat
- Howe v. Smith
- Hewitt v. Helms
- Olim v. Wakinekona
- Vitek v. JonesLaw held unconstitutional
- City of Revere v. Massachusetts General Hospital
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Smith v. Phillips
- City of Mesquite v. Aladdin's Castle, Inc.
- Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.
- Santosky v. KramerLaw held unconstitutional
- Little v. StreaterLaw held unconstitutional
- Greene v. LindseyLaw held unconstitutional
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Texaco, Inc. v. Short
- Smith v. Phillips
- City of Mesquite v. Aladdin's Castle, Inc.
- Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.
- Schweiker v. McClure
- Greene v. LindseyLaw held unconstitutional
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error