Legal Opinion
Wright v. Enomoto
District Court, N.D. California
Decided February 21, 1978No. C-73-1422 SAWPublishedCited by 106 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WEIGEL, District Judge.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND JUDGMENT
This action was brought by plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and the class of all male prisoners confined or subject to confinement in maximum security at four State of California prisons located, respectively, at San Quentin, Folsom, Soledad and Tracy. Defendants are the wardens of the prisons and the director of the Department of Corrections. 1 The class, certified on February 25, 1976, is divided into three subclasses: (1) All prisoners confined and/or subject to being confined in maximum security units at the four…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Meachum v. FanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by106 opinions
- Hewitt v. HelmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Vitek v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Joseph Toussaint, Plaintiffs/appellees/cross-Appellants v. Daniel McCarthy Defendants/appellants/cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Isiah Carl Green v. Dan v. McKaskle Acting Director, Texas Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986
- David R. Ruiz, United States of America, Intervenor-Appellee v. W. J. Estelle, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1982
101 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.