Legal Opinion
Mullen v. Bureau of Prisons
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided February 21, 2012No. Civil Action No. 2010-1561PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AMY BERMAN JACKSON, District Judge.
Plaintiff, a prisoner currently, at the Federal Correctional Institution (“FCI”) in Ray Brook, New York, alleges that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) has acted with deliberate indifference to his serious medical need for treatment for two hernias. Invoking Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), plaintiff seeks $250,000 in monetary damages, Compl. at 1, and a declaratory judgment, “declaring that [h]is rights under the Eighth Amendment ... were in fact violated by…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Federal Deposit Insurance v. MeyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Davis v. PassmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. Nordic Village, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Townsend v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Clayton v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- XP Vehicles, Inc. v. Department of EnergyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Cornish v. United States of AmericaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Scurlock v. LappinsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.