Legal Opinion
Udey v. Kastner
District Court, E.D. Texas
Decided September 24, 1986No. TX-85-175-CAPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HALL, District Judge.
Today this Court must decide whether the federal prison system is constitutionally required to provide Petitioner Edwin Udey with an “organic diet”. Udey contends that he must be fed the proscribed fare because his diet is mandated by sincere religious beliefs. U.S. CONST, amend. I (free exercise clause).
On November 1, 1985, this Court adopted the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Harry W. McKee which concluded that “the beliefs of the petitioner are not sincerely held religious beliefs [and that] [therefore, the right to partake of his specific diet…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Cruz v. BetoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Pell v. ProcunierSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners' Labor Union, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fillmore v. OrdonezDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1993
- Ed Udey v. D.C. Kastner, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1987
- Madison v. RiterDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2003
- Reed v. FaulknerDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1987