Legal Opinion
Hadix v. Johnson
District Court, W.D. Michigan
Decided July 3, 1996No. File 4:92:CV:110PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ENSLEN, Chief Judge.
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for immediate termination of the Consent Decree, pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA” or “the Act”), Pub.L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, amending 18 U.S.C. § 3626, filed June 11, 1996.
Section 802 of the PLRA amends 18 U.S.C. § 3626, regarding appropriate remedies with respect to prison conditions. Section 3626(b) entitles a defendant or intervener in an action involving prison conditions to move for immediate termination of any prospective relief which was “approved or granted in the absence of a…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Griffith v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- James Benjamin v. Michael Jacobson, Commissioner of the Department of Correction of the City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Hadix v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
- Carty v. FarrellyDistrict Court, Virgin Islands · 1997
- Richard A. French v. Jack R. Duckworth, and United States of America, Intervenor-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
- Jensen v. County of LakeDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1997
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.