Cunningham v. Eyman
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Illinois inmate Bennie Cunningham appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). Cunningham alleges that various correctional officers and United States Marshals violated his Eighth Amendment rights by refusing to remove his hand and ankle restraints, forcing him to urinate and defecate on himself. The district concluded that his claims were barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Sandin v. ConnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Edwards v. BalisokSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Anderson-Bey v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
- (PC) Younger v. Officer AlvarezDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2024
- Antione L. Harris v. Brett HommesDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2025
- Baker v. EtsingerDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2025
- Borges v. BoelterDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2021
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.