Legal Opinion
Zigmund v. Foster
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided June 30, 2000No. 3:97CV1989 (GLG) (JGM)PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING AND ORDER
GOETTEL, District Judge.
The plaintiff filed this action pro se and in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 Ü.S.C. § 1915. He claims that the defendants, Dr. Carl Chi, Dr. John Young, Ronald Hoyte, Georgia Hutchinson, Louise Patterson arid Dr. Hilliard Foster, violated his rights under the First, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, the Connecticut Constitution and the Connecticut Patient’s Bill of Rights, by depriving him of his radio and private room without affording him due process, confining him in seclusion and four-point restraints and interfering…
2Cases cited35 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
- Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Berry v. MarchinkowskiDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2015
- Hopkins v. New England Health Care Employees Welfare FundDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2013
- Nguyen v. Department of Corrections & Community ServicesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- M.H. Ex Rel. H. v. Bristol Board of EducationDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2001
- Dreamcatcher Software Development, LLC v. Pop Warner Little Scholars, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2004
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.