Legal Opinion

James Martin Hudspeth v. Donald Figgins, Sergeant Nesselrodt, Correctional Officers of Virginia Department of Corrections Field Unit 30

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided October 5, 1978No. 77-1442PublishedCited by 196 opinions

1Per curiam

Hudspeth’s § 1983 complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. We reverse, for, liberally construing Hudspeth’s pro se complaint, as we must under Haines v. Ker-ner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972), we think he stated a claim of constitutional deprivation.

*1347Hudspeth, a Virginia prisoner, claims that the two defendants, institutional officers, interfered with his access to the courts, placed his life in danger, and subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment. These claims arise out of two incidents. The first one is described in the…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. Bounds v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by196 opinions

  1. Patrick Booker v. South Carolina Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2017
  2. Irving v. DormireCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
  3. Chester Patterson v. Barry MintzesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
  4. Milhouse v. CarlsonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
  5. John Tarkowski v. Robert Bartlett Realty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1980

191 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API