Printer Friendly
The Free Library
14,505,585 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

Pack v. Artuz.


U.S. District Court

ASBESTOS

Pack v. Artuz, 348 F.Supp.2d 63 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). A state prisoner one in confinement, or under arrest, for a political offense.

See also: State
 brought a pro se [section] 1983 action alleging failure to protect him from exposure to potentially dangerous levels of asbestos. The district court held that there was no evidence that the prisoner's Eighth Amendment rights were violated, absent evidence that the level of exposure posed an unreasonable risk of serious damage to his immediate or future health. 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, there was no evidence of either the intensity or duration of the alleged exposure in most of the cell block, and even in areas where exposure was assumed, there was no evidence as to the concentration of airborne asbestos fibers or that the inmate had an asbestos-related disease. (Green Haven Correctional Facility Green Haven Correctional Facility is a maximum security prison in New York, United States. The prison is located in the Town of Beekman in Dutchess County. It was originally a federal prison and now houses maximum security inmates. Notable Inmates
  • Ronald Defeo Jr.
, New York New York, state, United States
New York, Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of
)
COPYRIGHT 2005 CRS, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2005, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT
Publication:Corrections Caselaw Quarterly
Article Type:Brief Article
Geographic Code:1U2NY
Date:May 1, 2005
Words:136
Previous Article:Purcell ex rel. Estate of Morgan v. Toombs County.(CLASSIFICATION & SEPARATION)(Brief Article)
Next Article:Board v. Farnham.(CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT)(Brief Article)
Topics:



Related Articles
Freeman v. Berge.(violation of United States Constitution. 8th Amendment)(Brief Article)
Freeman v. Berge.(cruel and unusual punishment)(Brief Article)
Freeman v. Berge.(violation of United States Constitution. 8th Amendment)(Brief Article)
Atwood v. Vilsack.(PRETRIAL DETENTION)
Jones v. Blanas.(PRETRIAL DETENTION)(Brief Article)
Withrow v. Donnelly.(violation of due process of law)(Brief Article)
Withrow v. Donnelly.(violation of due process of law)(Brief Article)
Magluta v. Samples.(PRETRIAL DETENTION)(Brief Article)
Sullivan v. Bornemann.(PRETRIAL DETENTION)(Brief Article)
King v. Frank.(violation of United States Constitution. 8th Amendment and United States Constitution. 1st Amendment)(Brief Article)

Terms of use | Copyright © 2009 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles