Legal Opinion

Hollihan v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided January 20, 2016No. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-CV-5PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge

The putative class action at bar challenges the confidential treatment regime of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (“Department”) colloquially known as the “One Good Eye” policy. Culled to its essence, this administrative policy denies cataract surgery to inmates who retain a threshold modicum of visual acuity in one eye, notwithstanding physician recommendations to the contrary. The court finds that such draconian medical treatment, as unearthed in the complaint, may transgress the Eighth Amendment.

Plaintiff Richard Hollihan (“Hollihan”)…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. West v. AtkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1988

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Cleveland v. GautreauxDistrict Court, M.D. Louisiana · 2016
  2. Abney v. YounkerDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
  3. BRACEY v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONSDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022
  4. BUSANET v. WETZELDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
  5. Bristol Oak Properties, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, et al.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2025

5 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