Legal Opinion
Gates v. Rowland
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 4, 1994No. Nos. 91-16702, 91-16780, 93-15363 and 93-16136PublishedCited by 155 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HUG, Circuit Judge:
A consent decree entered into by various California state officials and a class, including all inmates at the California Medical Facility (“CMF”) in Vacaville, California, gives rise to these three separate appeals and a cross-appeal. The inmates brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to challenge deficient medical and psychiatric care, indecent confinement conditions, and treatment and segregation of HIV-positive inmates at the CMF — Main and Northern Reception Center. The consent decree included a provision for payment of attorneys’ fees.
In No. 93-15363, the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Turner v. SafleySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Procunier v. MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- School Bd. of Nassau Cty. v. ArlineSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Harris v. ThigpenCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by155 opinions
- Pierce v. County of OrangeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Armstrong v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- John Doe v. University of Maryland Medical System CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1995
- Thompson v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Elouise Cobell v. Sally JewellCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2015
150 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.