Legal Opinion
Hoffman v. Tuten
District Court, D. South Carolina
Decided August 9, 2006No. CA.9:05 1773 PMD GCKPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
DUFFY, District Judge.
On June 21, 2005, pro se litigant Frank E. Hoffman (“Plaintiff’ or “Hoffman”) brought an action against employees of the Bureau of Prisons, Defendants Cindy Tuten, Bernardo Parina, M.D. and Jackie Reed-Bush, alleging violations of his rights under the Eighth Amendment. This matter is before the court upon Magistrate Judge George C. Kosko’s recommendation that this court grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court received the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) on May 31, 2006. A party may object, in writing, to a R & R within ten days after…
2Cases cited74 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Byrd v. StirlingDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2015
- Bradley v. Guardian IndustriesDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2021
- Gibbs v. South Carolina CourthouseDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2020
- Long v. Loris Police DepartmentDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2020
- Marshall v. SterlingDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2024
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.