Legal Opinion
Lee Moorman, Jr. v. John A. Thalacker
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided May 14, 1996No. 95-2245, 95-2297PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BEAM, Circuit Judge.
Lee Moorman was disciplined after he was found to have violated prison regulations. The discipline included the loss of sixteen days of good time. He filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming that prison officials violated his rights to due process. The district court 1 denied the officials qualified immunity and ruled in favor of Moorman. Moorman appeals the determination of damages and the prison officials appeal both the district court’s denial of qualified immunity and its determination of liability on the merits. We reverse.
I. BACKGROUND
In 1984, Moorman was sentenced…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Sandin v. ConnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Malley v. BriggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lee Moorman, Jr. v. John A. Thalacker, Sued as John Thalacker Larry Brimeyer Thomas Luensman, Sued as C/o Luensman Jerome Manternach, Sued as Jerry Manternach, Charles Lee, Harold Wood, Lee Moorman, Jr. v. John A. Thalacker, Sued as John Thalacker Larry Brimeyer Thomas Luensman, Sued as C/o Luensman Jerome Manternach, Sued as Jerry Manternach Charles Lee Harold WoodCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
- Trujillo v. PlougheCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2012