Legal Opinion
Kurtz v. Denniston
District Court, N.D. Iowa
Decided December 19, 1994No. C 92-0212PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BENNETT, District Judge.
I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND .... . 633
II.STANDARDS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. CO
A. Undisputed Facts.
B. Disputed Facts.
III.LEGAL ANALYSIS.
A. Mootness Of Injunctive Relief. OS CO OS
B. Qualified Immunity.
1. Plaintiffs’ Assertion Of An Issue Of Fact OS CO
2. Denniston’s Claim Of Qualified Immunity OS CO
IV.CONCLUSION.
Plaintiff prison inmates brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 alleging violation of their rights to freedom of religion by denial of their requests for “non-pork” cards by defendant…
2Cases cited64 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Jaeger v. Dubuque CountyDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1995
- Brakeall v. BieberDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2020
- Lucero v. Pennington County Sherrifs Office Jail DivisionDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2020