Legal Opinion
Fort v. PALMATTER
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided August 30, 2000No. 99C-14738; CA A108265PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWollheim, J.
Plaintiff appeals from the trial court’s dismissal of his writ of habeas corpus in which he alleged his food was intentionally contaminated with saliva and other unknown bodily excretions. We reverse and remand.
Plaintiff is an inmate at the Oregon State Penitentiary (OSP). In March 1999, plaintiff was placed in segregation. Plaintiff filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he was improperly housed in segregation 1 and that while he was there, his meal trays were contaminated with saliva and other bodily excretions of OSP staff and corrections officers. Plaintiff alleged…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Charles M. KEENAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Frank HALL, Director Oregon Department of Corrections, Et Al., Defendants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Jones v. General Motors Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1997
- Bedell v. SchiedlerOregon Supreme Court · 1989
- McClintock v. SchiedlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- Umatilla County v. $18,005 in U.S. CurrencyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
3Cited by8 opinions
- Phillips v. Restaurant Management of Carolina, L.P.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- Roy v. PalmateerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
- Barrett v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
- Burnett v. LampertCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- Dunn v. HillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.