Legal Opinion

Walter Rodenhurst, Iii v. Kay Bauman

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided February 19, 2013No. 11-17032UnpublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Hawaii state prisoner Walter V. Roden-hurst, III, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference, violations of his right of access to the courts, and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Rodenhurst’s Eighth Amendment claims because Rodenhurst failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants acted with deliberate…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  2. Toguchi v. Soon Hwang ChungCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  3. Lance Jett v. M. Penner, D. Peterson, and Cheryl K. Pliler, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
  4. Oscar W. Jones v. Lou Blanas County of SacramentoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  5. Padgett v. WrightCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Aipoalani v. DerrDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2022
  2. Aipoalani v. DerrDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API