×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Court Dismissed Suit Over Reversed Disciplinary Charges
The plaintiff says that the defendants were responsible for issuing disciplinary reports against him that were overturned. At 1351: "Defendants correctly concede that such a claim may be cognizable under 1983 if the Reports resulted in the lengthening of Plaintiff's term of incarceration or the suffering of atypical and significant hardship."
This has become transformed in the West headnote writer's mind to "Issuance of false disciplinary report against prisoner is cognizable as due process violation under 1983 if report resulted in lengthening of term of incarceration or suffering of atypical and significant hardship." Wrong.
If good time credits were taken but the disciplinary conviction was overturned, presumably the good time was given back, so there is no claim.
Even though segregation time was allegedly assessed, nothing in the record shows that it was served, and there is no evidence of the conditions, so there is no claim.
The plaintiff's claim of deprivation of medical care is dismissed, since he got lots of medical care and the medical staff said he was feigning anyway.
The plaintiff said he was beaten on April 30, but prison records show the defendants were not on duty that day. He now says he's not sure about the date, but he has previously said it took place 24 hours before his transfer, which fixes the date at April 30, so summary judgment is granted to the defendants. See: Gonzalez v. Monty, 89 F.Supp.2d 1347 (S.D.Fla. 2000).
This has become transformed in the West headnote writer's mind to "Issuance of false disciplinary report against prisoner is cognizable as due process violation under 1983 if report resulted in lengthening of term of incarceration or suffering of atypical and significant hardship." Wrong.
If good time credits were taken but the disciplinary conviction was overturned, presumably the good time was given back, so there is no claim.
Even though segregation time was allegedly assessed, nothing in the record shows that it was served, and there is no evidence of the conditions, so there is no claim.
The plaintiff's claim of deprivation of medical care is dismissed, since he got lots of medical care and the medical staff said he was feigning anyway.
The plaintiff said he was beaten on April 30, but prison records show the defendants were not on duty that day. He now says he's not sure about the date, but he has previously said it took place 24 hours before his transfer, which fixes the date at April 30, so summary judgment is granted to the defendants. See: Gonzalez v. Monty, 89 F.Supp.2d 1347 (S.D.Fla. 2000).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Gonzalez v. Monty
| Year | 2000 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 89 F.Supp.2d 1347 (S.D.Fla. 2000) |
| Level | District Court |
| Injunction Status | N/A |