Legal Opinion
Gluth v. Kangas
District Court, D. Arizona
Decided August 28, 1990No. CIV 84-1626 PHX CAMPublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
MUECKE, District Judge.
Having considered the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed April 22, 1988, and the Response and Reply thereto, this Court hereby finds and concludes as follows:
Gluth’s motion for summary judgment argues that he is entitled to summary judgment on all three counts of his second amended complaint. In response, the Defendants do not argue that a material factual dispute precludes summary judgment. Instead, the Defendants contend that because the Prison’s new library access policy is constitutionally adequate and Gluth has only sought injunctive relief,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bounds v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Joseph Toussaint, Plaintiffs/appellees/cross-Appellants v. Daniel McCarthy Defendants/appellants/cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Temple v. EllerthorpeDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 1984
- Phillip L. Lindquist v. Idaho State Board of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Sands v. LewisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Carl Anthony Thomas v. Samuel A. LewisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Casey v. LewisDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 1992
- Hook v. State of Ariz.District Court, D. Arizona · 1995
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.