This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Petitioner (Edward G. McDonough), petitioner Edward G. McDonough filed a Section 1983 lawsuit alleging that the respondent, Youel Smith, pursued criminal proceedings based on fabricated evidence.
The malicious prosecution claim in the lawsuit was dismissed by the Second Circuit and the dismissal remains unchallenged.
The United States, as amicus curiae, argues that the analogous common‑law tort is Heck malicious prosecution, and that favorable termination is an element of the Section 1983 claim.
Background and question before the Court
Justice Sotomayor asked whether the petitioner's claim requires a finding of probable cause.
According to Justice Gorsuch, justice Gorsuch made a comment unrelated to the case.
Justice Kavanaugh asked what state‑law torts the petitioner might bring under the facts.
Justice Gorsuch questioned whether an element of the claim is now always required.
Justice Kagan noted the petitioner’s difficulty in stating the claim.
According to Justice Breyer, justice Breyer expressed concern about mixing civil lawsuits with ongoing criminal trials.
Justice Ginsburg asked about the effect of an acquittal on liberty deprivation.
- [1] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 5
- [2] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 8
- [3] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 20
- [4] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 25
- [5] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 45
- [6] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 47
- [7] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 54
What each side argues
Petitioner (Edward G. McDonough)
According to Petitioner (Edward G. McDonough), petitioner alleges that the criminal prosecution was based on fabricated evidence.
Petitioner asserts two claims: malicious prosecution and fabrication of evidence.
Petitioner argues that even after an acquittal, there may be limited circumstances where independent fabricated evidence supports a claim.
Respondent (Youel Smith, Special District Attorney)
Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.
United States (Amicus Curiae)
The United States, as amicus, argues that the appropriate tort analog is Heck malicious prosecution, and that favorable termination is an element of the Section 1983 claim.
What happened at oral argument
Justice Sotomayor asked whether the petitioner's claim requires a finding of probable cause.
According to Justice Gorsuch, justice Gorsuch made a comment unrelated to the case.
Justice Kavanaugh asked what state‑law torts the petitioner might bring under the facts.
Justice Gorsuch questioned whether an element of the claim is now always required.
Justice Kagan noted the petitioner’s difficulty in stating the claim.
According to Justice Breyer, justice Breyer expressed concern about mixing civil lawsuits with ongoing criminal trials.
Justice Ginsburg asked about the effect of an acquittal on liberty deprivation.
- [1] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 5
- [2] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 8
- [3] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 20
- [4] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 25
- [5] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 45
- [6] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 47
- [7] b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdf, p. 54
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- b2c83e81dcb3a1205fa8-r1-295c6e85cd63d90e.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 26, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.