Legal Opinion

Bishop v. Doe

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided May 4, 1990No. 89-2154PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BALDOCK, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiff-appellant, Stephen Bishop, instituted this diversity action under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 in the New Mexico federal district court, purporting to allege a cause of action under the New Mexico Tort Claims Act, N.M.Stat.Ann. §§ 41-4-1 to 41-4-29 (Repl.Pamp.1989). According to his complaint, Bishop, while in the custody of the New Mexico Department of Corrections, was exercising with an improperly installed and maintained “speed bag” which disassembled and caused him injury. Upon the defendants-appellees motion, the district court dismissed Bishop’s complaint as barred…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Alabama v. PughSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Florida Department of State v. Treasure Salvors, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Wojciechowski v. HarrimanDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 1985

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Bishop v. John Doe 1Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
  2. Kenneth E. Dunklee v. Mercedes Murphy, et al.District Court, D. New Mexico · 2026

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API