50. Work-prisoner.U.S. District Court SLAVERY Bao Ge v. Li Peng Li Peng (lē pŭng), 1928–, Chinese Communist leader, premier of China (1988–98), b. Chengdu, Sichuan prov., China. Orphaned at age three when his father was executed by the Kuomintang, Li became the adopted son of Zhou Enlai. . 201 F.Supp.2d 14 (D.D.C. 2000). Chinese citizens who were allegedly forced to perform slave labor in prison camps brought a proposed class action suit against Chinese government Ever since Republic of China founded in January 1st, 1912, China has had several regional and national governments. List
U.S. Appeals Court RELIGION Fenelon v. Riddle, 34 Fed.Appx. 265 (9th Cir. 2002). An inmate brought an action against prison officials, alleging that the First Amendment required the prison to permit him to attend a weekly Jumu'ah service for Muslims, and that the time spent in the service should count toward the reduction of his sentence under a state work incentive program. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the inmate and entered a permanent injunction permanent injunction n. a final order of a court that a person or entity refrain from certain activities permanently or take certain actions (usually to correct a nuisance) until completed. . The appeals court reversed and remanded, finding that the district court had erred in interpreting Jumu'ah as a non-routine religious function, which made it eligible for a prison regulation that governed excused time off. (California Medical Facility California State Medical Corrections Facility, also known as CMF, is the state's largest prison hospital. CMF is the older of the two prisons in Vacaville, California. It has been in operation for about 50 years. Prison, California Department of Corrections) U.S. Appeals Court WORK RELEASE Kitchen v. Upshaw, 286 F.3d 179 (4th Cir. 2002). A former jail inmate brought a [section] 1983 action against a regional jail authority and jail officials, alleging violation of his due process rights when he was not allowed to participate in a work release program. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants and the appeals court affirmed. The appeals court held that the authority was not an arm of the state and was therefore not protected by Eleventh Amendment The Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: immunity. But the court held that the inmate did not have a liberty interest under state law in participating in a work release program that was protected by the due process clause. (Riverside Regional Jail, Virginia) U.S. Appeals Court ASSIGNMENT Lomholt v. Holder, 287 F.3d 683 (8th Cir. 2002). A prisoner appealed the district court's dismissal of his [section] 1983 action against prison officials. The appeals court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The appeals court held that allegations that the prisoner had been placed "in the hole" for religious fasting were sufficient to state a free exercise of religion claim under [section] 1983. The court found that the sore feet from which the prisoner suffered did not amount to a serious medical need. The court also held that the prisoner had no right to a particular prison job. The court upheld the dismissal of the prisoner's complaint concerning the handling of his grievances because the prisoner only alleged that officials had denied his grievances, not prohibited him from filing any grievances. The court also held that regulation of the prisoner's access to his attorney did not violate the First Amendment or [section] 1983 because the prisoner did not show how being denied access to his attorney had impeded his access to the courts. (Iowa) U.S. Appeals Court PAYMENT Love v. McKune, 33 Fed.Appx. 369 (10th Cir. 2002). Four prison inmates brought a civil rights action challenging their forced participation in a prison incentive level system that tied inmate privileges to participation in programs and good behavior Orderly and lawful action; conduct that is deemed proper for a peaceful and law-abiding individual. The definition of good behavior depends upon how the phrase is used. . The district court dismissed the action and the appeals court affirmed. The appeals court held that forced participation did not violate the inmates' Fourteenth Amendment Fourteenth Amendment, addition to the U.S. Constitution, adopted 1868. The amendment comprises five sections. Section 1 Section 1 of the amendment declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States are American citizens and citizens due process rights. The Internal Management Policy and Procedure (IMPP (Instant Messaging and Presence Protocol) The working group of the IETF that specializes in instant messaging. The IMPP group developed the CPIM abstract model, PIDF presence document and spawned working groups for the APEX, PRIM and SIMPLE IM protocols, the ) system assigned inmates to one of four levels. Each level had a corresponding level of privileges, such as television ownership, handicrafts, participation in organizations, use of outside funds, canteen expenditures, incentive pay, and visitation. The system had been previously upheld by the state supreme court, which found that none of the restrictions denied to inmates on lower levels infringed on inmates' property or liberty interests and therefore did not implicate im·pli·cate tr.v. im·pli·cat·ed, im·pli·cat·ing, im·pli·cates 1. To involve or connect intimately or incriminatingly: evidence that implicates others in the plot. 2. due process protection. The appeals court noted that denying an inmate the use of certain electronic equipment does not impose a significant hardship, nor do restrictions on canteen purchases or the types of purchases and personal property allowed. (Lansing Correctional Facility Lansing Correctional Facility (LCF) is a state prison operated by the Kansas Department of Corrections located in Lansing, Kansas in Leavenworth County. LCF, along with the United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth and the United States Disciplinary Barracks in Fort Leavenworth, are , Kansas) U.S. Appeals Court RIGHT TO WORK Moore v. Chavez, 36 Fed.Appx. 169 (6th Cir. 2002). A state prisoner one in confinement, or under arrest, for a political offense. See also: State brought suits against a state corrections department and correctional officials, alleging that he was improperly denied indigent indigent 1) n. a person so poor and needy that he/she cannot provide the necessities of life (food, clothing, decent shelter) for himself/herself. 2) n. one without sufficient income to afford a lawyer for defense in a criminal case. status after he dropped out of an educational course, and that the defendants denied him employment when he refused to take a qualifying exam. The district court entered judgments generally in favor of the defendants and the appeals court affirmed. The appeals court held that the denial of indigent status did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment Such punishment as would amount to torture or barbarity, any cruel and degrading punishment not known to the Common Law, or any fine, penalty, confinement, or treatment that is so disproportionate to the offense as to shock the moral sense of the community. , even though the prisoner alleged that as a result of losing his indigent status he could not receive a loan to purchase hygiene items. The court noted that the inmate did not allege that he suffered extreme discomfort or that he was completely denied the basic elements of hygiene. The appeals court held that the prisoner's claim that the defendants discriminated against him because he had to use a wheelchair and could not take tests under pressure, was barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity. (Michigan Department of Corrections The Michigan Department of Corrections oversees prisons and other correctional facilities in the state of Michigan, USA. It has some 43 prison facilities, 10 camps and a Special Alternative Incarceration program, together composing approximately 50,000 inmates. ) U.S. District Court RELIGION Murphy v. Carroll, 202 F.Supp.2d 421 (D.Md. 2002). A Jewish inmate brought a pro se [section] 1983 action against prison officials, seeking injunctive relief injunctive relief n. a court-ordered act or prohibition against an act or condition which has been requested, and sometimes granted, in a petition to the court for an injunction. and damages resulting from their refusal to accommodate his request for an alternative cell cleanup day other than Saturday. The district court held that the officials' designation of Saturday as cell cleanup day violated the inmate's First Amendment right to practice his religion, but that the policy did not violate a clearly established right at the time, entitling officials to qualified immunity Qualified immunity is a doctrine in United States law providing immunity from suit to government officials performing discretionary functions when their action did not violate clearly established law. Qualified immunity was created by the U.S. . The court found no rational connection between the prison policy of Saturday-only-cell-cleaning and the prison's interest in efficiency, safety and security. According to according to prep. 1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians. 2. In keeping with: according to instructions. 3. the court, at the time of the violation there was "virtually no guidance in case law regarding observance of Jewish sabbath in [the] context of prison work." (Maryland Correctional Training Center) TABLE OF CASES Alexander v. Gilmore, 202 F.Supp.2d 478 (ED.Va. 2002). 11, 13, 27, 38 Atchison v. Collins, 288 F.3d 177 (5th Cir. 2002). 1, 4, 35 Austin v. Wilkinson, 189 F.Supp.2d 719 (N.D. Ohio 2002). 3, 7, 8, 10, 38 Bao Ge v. Li Peng, 201 F.Supp.2d 14 (D.D.C. 2000). 7, 50 Bazzetta v. McGinnis, 286 F.3d 311 (6th Cir. 2002). [Reversed by U.S. Supreme Court on June 16, 2003, in a unanimous decision A Unanimous Decision is a winning criterion in several full-contact combat sports, such as boxing, kickboxing, Muay Thai, mixed martial arts and others sports involving striking in which all 3 judges agree on which fighter won the match. .] 7, 11, 19, 38, 49 Beerheide v. Suthers, 286 F.3d 1179 (10th Cir. 2002). 4, 18, 37 Brown v. Williams, 36 Fed.Appx. 361 (10th Cir. 2002). 1, 28, 33 Burke v. North Dakota North Dakota, state in the N central United States. It is bordered by Minnesota, across the Red River of the North (E), South Dakota (S), Montana (W), and the Canadian provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba (N). Corrections and Rehabilit., 294 F.3d 1043 (8th Cir. 2002). 1, 29 Caldwell v. District of Columbia, 201 F.Supp.2d 27 (D.D.C. 2001). 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 27, 29, 40 Cantu v. Jones, 293 F.3d 839 (5th Cir. 2002). 14, 27 Carlyle v. Aubrey, 189 F.Supp.2d 660 (W.D.Ky. 2001). 9, 15,18, 29, 32, 40 Carter v. McGrady, 292 F.3d 152 (3rd Cir. 2002). 1, 41 Coley coley Noun Brit an edible fish with white or grey flesh [perhaps from coalfish] v. Grant County, 36 Fed.Appx. 242 (9th Cir. 2002). 31 Curtis v. Curtis, 37 Fed. Appx. 141 (6th Cir. 2002). 23 Derby Industries, Inc. v. Chestnut Ridge Chestnut Ridge may refer to:
Dixon v. Page, 291 F.3d 485 (7th Cir. 2002). 13 Farmer v. Perill, 288 F.3d 1254 (10th Cir. 2002). 17, 33, 41 Fenelon v. Riddle, 34 Fed. Appx. 265 (9th Cir. 2002). 37, 50 Ferguson v. New Mexico New Mexico, state in the SW United States. At its northwestern corner are the so-called Four Corners, where Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah meet at right angles; New Mexico is also bordered by Oklahoma (NE), Texas (E, S), and Mexico (S). Corrections Dept., 38 Fed. Appx. 561 (10th Cir. 2002). 1, Fermin-Rodriguez v. Westchester County Jail Med., 191 F.Supp.2d 358 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). 47 Fiesel v. Cherry, 294 F.3d 664 (5th Cir. 2002). 31 Flores Flores, town, Guatemala Flores (flōrəs), town (1990 est. pop. 2,200), capital of Petén department, N Guatemala. Flores was built on an island in the southern part of Lake Petén Itzá and on the site of the v. O'Donnell, 36 Fed. Appx. 204 (7th Cir. 2002). 9, 10, 15 Ford v. County of Oakland, 35 Fed. Appx. 393 (6th Cir. 2002). 13, 14, 17 Foster v. Lawson, 291 F.3d 1050 (8th Cir. 2002). 1, 41 Gallardo v. Dicarlo, 203 F.Supp.2d 1160 (C.D.Cal. 2002). 14, 17, 48 Gartrell v. Ashcroft, 191 F.Supp.2d 23 (D.D.C. 2002). 19, 37, 38 Gerber v. Hickman, 291 F.3d 617 (9th Cir. 2002). 7, 19, 38, 49 Hallett v. Morgan, 287 F.3d 1193 (9th Cir. 2002). 17, 27, 30 Halpin v. Simmons, 33 Fed. Appx. 961 (10th Cir. 2002). 29, 47 Helton v. U.S., 191 F.Supp.2d 179 (D.D.C. 2002). 17, 25, 27, 32, 41 Higgins v. Beyer, 293 F.3d 683 (3rd Cir. 2002). 4, 35, 43 Higgs v. Carver, 286 F.3d 437 (7th Cir. 2002). 3, 11, 32 Hoskins v. McBride, 202 F.Supp.2d 839 (N.D.Ind. 2002). 11, 20, 22 In re Alea, 286 F.3d 378 (6th Cir. 2002). 1, 4, 35 Kitchen v. Upshaw, 286 F.3d 179 (4th Cir. 2002). 8, 24, 36, 50 Lawson v. Dallas County Dallas County is the name of five counties in the United States of America:
Leamer v. Fauver, 288 F.3d 532 (3ra Cir. 2002). 34, 43 Lomholt v. Holder, 287 F.3d 683 (8th Cir. 2002). 21, 37, 50 Love v. McCown, 38 Fed. Appx. 355 (8th Cir. 2002). 18, 37 Love v. McKune, 33 Fed. Appx. 369 (10th Cir. 2002). 7, 8, 12, 34, 38, 42, 50 Martinez v. Hedrick, 36 Fed. Appx. 209 (7th Cir. 2002). 11, 22, 38 Martinez v. Johnson, 33 Fed. Appx. 395 (10th Cir. 2002). 47 McQuillion v. McKenzie, 35 Fed. Appx. 547 (9th Cir. 2002). 19 Mitchell v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 294 F.3d 1309 (11th Cir. 2002). 1, 27 Moffat v. Broyles, 288 F.3d 978 (7th Cir. 2002). 11, 20 Montgomery v. Pinchak, 294 F.3d 492 (3rd Cir. 2002). 1, 29 Moore v. Chavez, 36 Fed. Appx. 169 (6th Cir. 2002). 23, 42, 50 Murphy v. Carroll, 202 F. Supp.2d 421 (D.Md. 2002). 7, 37, 38, 50 Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623 (9th Cir. 2002). 7, 9, 15, 32 Pardue Ex Rel ex rel. conj. abbreviation for Latin ex relatione, meaning "upon being related" or "upon information," used in the title of a legal proceeding filed by a state attorney general (or the federal Department of Justice) on behalf of the government, on the instigation of . Christian v. Ashe, 36 Fed. Appx. 199 (6th Cir. 2002). 14, 25.32 Peate v. McCann, 294 F.3d 879 (7th Cir. 2002). 14, 39 Pelletier v. Magnuson, 201 F.Supp.2d 148 (D.Me. 2002). 14, 29, 30 Portley-El v. Brill, 288 F.3d 1063 (8th Cir. 2002). 20 Rapier v. Kankakee County, Ill., 203 F. Supp.2d 978 (C.D.Ill. 2002). 14, 32, 45 Regional Economic Community v. City of Middletown, 294 F.3d 35 (2nd Cir. 2002). 2, 15 Robinson v. Hager, 292 F.3d 560 (8th Cir. 2002). 29 Rogers v. Morris, 34 Fed. Appx. 481 (7th Cir. 2002). 19, 28, 38, 39 Sanchez-Velasco v. Secretary of Dept. of Corr., 287 F.3d 1015 (11th Cir. 2002). 22 Smith v. Lejeune, 203 F.Supp.2d 1260 (D.Wyo. 2002). 14, 29, 32, 46 Smith v. Mensinger, 293 F.3d 641 (3rd Cir. 2002). 14 Smith v. Mensinger, 293 F.3d 641 (3rd Cir. 2002). 14 Sorrels v. McKee, 287 F.3d 1213 (9th Cir. 2002). 28, 39 Thompson v. Davis, 295 F.3d 890 (9th Cir. 2002). 7, 34, 36 Tobias v. Campbell, 202 F.Supp.2d 934 (E.D.Mo. 2001). 14 Toolasprashad v. Bureau of Prisons, 286 F.3d 576 (D.C. Cir. 2002). 21, 33, 47 Torres v. Fauver, 292 F.3d 141 (3rd Cir. 2002). 3, 11, 13 Townsend v. Moya, 291 F.3d 859 (5th Cir. 2002). 14, 27 U.S.v. Durham, 287 F.3d 1297 (11th Cir. 2002). 1,39,48 U.S.v. Hager, 288 F.3d 136 (4th Cir. 2002). 43 U.S.v. Warden, 291 F.3d 363 (5th Cir. 2002). 4, 43 Ueland v. U.S., 291 F.3d 993 (7th Cir. 2002). 27 Veney v. Wyche, 293 F.3d 726 (4th Cir. 2002). 3, 7, 8, 9 Walker v. Benjamin, 293 F.3d 1030 (7th Cir. 2002). 29 Walker v. Thompson, 288 F.3d 1005 (7th Cir. 2002). 1, 21, 22, 36 Warren v. Shelby County, Tenn., 191 F.Supp.2d 980 (W.D.Tenn. 2001). 13, 29 Williams v. City of Las Vegas
The City of Las Vegas , 34 Fed. Appx. 297 (9th Cir. 2002). 25, 32, 39, 48 |
|
||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion