Legal Opinion
Kevin Holcomb v. Mark Lykens, Sean Smith, Joanne Pereria and John Gorczyk
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided July 23, 2003No. Docket 02-7838PublishedCited by 166 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SACK, Circuit Judge.
The plaintiff Kevin Holcomb brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that his procedural due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution were violated when the defendants revoked his extended furlough 1 from prison without following the Vermont Department of Corrections’ written procedures. The district court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, concluding that qualified immunity protects the defendants from Holcomb’s claim. We affirm the judgment of the district court, but on other grounds.
BACKGROUND
The facts…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Sandin v. ConnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- County of Sacramento v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Meachum v. FanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by166 opinions
- Walczyk v. RioCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Shakur v. SelskyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- Gibbons v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2019
- Victory v. PatakiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016
- Gonzalez-Fuentes v. MolinaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2010
161 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.