green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
33.7 score
“rison administration is not under an affirmative duty to provide each inmate with the spiritual counselor of his choice.”
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1987
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Wilson v. Beaulieu
rison administration is not under an affirmative duty to provide each inmate with the spiritual counselor of his choice.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Jama v. Ball
However, these opportunities need not be identical; rather, prisons must make “good faith accommodation of the prisoner’s rights in light of practical considerations.” Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir. 1987).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Taylor v. Haroun
Thus, there is no requirement that “every sect or group within a 17 prison” have “identical facilities or personnel.” Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 568 (1987) (citing 18 Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 , 322 n.2 (1972)); accord Hartmann, 707 F.3d at 1123-24 (finding 19 Wiccan inmates did not have Equal Protection right to paid chaplain when they had access to a 20 volunteer chaplain)). 21 To make an Equal Protection claim, an inmate plaintiff must show either: that defendants 22 intentionally discriminated against him on the basis of his faith, see Hartmann, 707 F.3d at 1123 ; 23 Thornton …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Doss v. Mule Creek State Prison
“This does not 25 mean, however, that all prisoners must receive identical treatment and resources.” Hartmann, 707 26 F.3d at 1123 (citing Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 , 322 n.2 (1972); Ward v. Walsh, 1 F.3d 873 , 880 27 (9th Cir. 1993); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 568-69 (9th Cir. 1987)). 28 “To prevail on an Equal Protection claim brought under § 1983, Plaintiff must allege facts 1 plausibly showing that ‘“the defendants acted with an intent or purpose to discriminate against 2 [them] based upon membership in a protected class. ’” Hartmann, 707 F.3d at 1123 (citing 3 Thornton…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Apache Stronghold v. USA
See, e.g., McElyea v. Babbitt, 833 F.2d 196 , 197–99 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing O’Lone and recognizing a Free Exercise Clause claim where a prison had no weekly Jewish services and the plaintiff alleged that prison officials “prevented him from practicing his religion”); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir. 1987) (assuming that denial of access to a sweat lodge was a viable Free Exercise Clause claim, but upholding the prison policy under the O’Lone, pre-RFRA, reasonableness test); cf. Freeman v. Arpaio, 125 F.3d 732, 736 (9th Cir. 1997) (holding, in a Free Exercise Clause case …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Apache Stronghold v. USA
See, e.g., McElyea v. Babbitt, 833 F.2d 196 , 197–99 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing O’Lone and recognizing a Free Exercise Clause claim where a prison had no weekly Jewish services and the plaintiff alleged that prison officials “prevented him from practicing his religion”); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir. 1987) (assuming that denial of access to a sweat lodge was a viable Free Exercise Clause claim, but upholding the prison policy under the O’Lone, pre-RFRA, reasonableness test); cf. Freeman v. Arpaio, 125 F.3d 732, 736 (9th Cir. 1997) (holding, in a Free Exercise Clause case …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Apache Stronghold v. USA
See, e.g., McElyea v. Babbitt, 833 F.2d 196 , 197–99 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing O’Lone and recognizing a Free Exercise Clause claim where a prison had no weekly Jewish services and the plaintiff alleged that prison officials “prevented him from practicing his religion”); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir. 1987) (assuming that denial of access to a sweat lodge was a viable Free Exercise Clause claim, but upholding the prison policy under the O’Lone, pre-RFRA, reasonableness test); cf. Freeman v. Arpaio, 125 F.3d 732, 736 (9th Cir. 1997) (holding, in a Free Exercise Clause case …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Sherman v. Wickham
Irreparable Injury 16 The Court next considers whether Sherman has shown irreparable injury. 17 Citing Allen v. Toombs 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir. 1987), Defendants maintain 18 that prohibiting access to a sweat lodge does not violate the First Amendment 19 under Ninth Circuit precedent and that Sherman therefore cannot demonstrate 20 irreparable injury.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Pevia v. Moyer
Md. 2020), the Court referred only to Pevia’s right to exercise his religion in general without defining its contours or addressing whether he had a right to access a sweat lodge under the facts of the case. to a sweat lodge was rationally related to the legitimate penological interests of safety and security at [the prison].”); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir. 1987) (affirming summary judgment where denial of “access to the Sweat Lodge ceremony [was] reasonably related to the defendants’ legitimate concern for prison security”); Neff v. Steven, No. RDB-14-718, 2014 WL 51…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Monical v. Winters
“Prisons need only provide inmates with a ‘reasonable opportunity’ to worship in accord with their conscience.” Johnson v. Moore, 948 F.2d 517, 520 (9th Cir. 1991) (quoting Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir. 1987)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cejas v. Brown`
“Prisons need only provide inmates with a 22 ‘reasonable opportunity’ to worship in accord with their conscience.” Johnson v. Moore, 23 948 F.2d 517, 520 (9th Cir. 1991) (quoting Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir. 24 1987)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Watkinson v. State of Alaska, Department of Corrections
Mr. Watkinson argues the so-called “missing witness rule” should apply in this case because the individual Defendants did not testify at trial.115 He asks this Court to infer from their absence: (1) “[d]uring the period 113 Turner, 482 U.S. at 85 (“Where a state penal system is involved, federal courts have . . . additional reason to accord deference to the appropriate prison authorities.”). 114 Freeman, 125 F.3d at 737 (alterations in original) (citing to Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir. 1987)). 115 Docket 92 at 13–14. in which virtual balances within the PWF were allo…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cejas v. Brown`
Rather, prisons “must make ‘good faith accommodation of the [prisoners’] rights 28 in light of practical considerations.’” Id. (quoting Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th 1 Cir. 1987)) (alteration in original).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Randolph v. Nevada Department of Corrections
(ECF No. 75 at 21 (citing to Allen v. 6 Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir. 1987) (holding that, where there are security 7 concerns, a prison may withhold certain religious exercises from inmates in a disciplinary 8 segregation unit, even though such exercises are permitted for the general population).) 9 Plaintiff also argues that Defendants’ security concerns are disingenuous and that not all 10 of Plaintiff’s Unit 8 is a disciplinary segregated unit.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jackson v. State of Nevada
Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing Turner, 482 U.S. at 89– 20 91). 21 b.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
American Humanist Ass'n v. United States
Prisons need not provide identical facilities or personnel to different faiths, see id. at 322 n. 2, 92 S.Ct. 1079 , but must make “good faith accommodation of the [prisoners’] rights in light of practical considerations.” Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Garnica v. Washington Department of Corrections
Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir.1987) (citing Turner, 482 U.S. at 89-91 , 107 S.Ct. 2254 ).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Shawna Hartmann v. California Department of Corr.
Cruz, 405 U.S. at 322 n. 2, 92 S.Ct. 1079 (“A special chapel or place of worship need not be provided for every faith regardless of size; nor must a chaplain, priest, or minister be provided without regard to the extent of *1123 the demand Ward v. Walsh, 1 F.3d 873, 880 (9th Cir.1993) (affirming summary judgment against Jewish prisoner’s Free Exercise claim because the prison had no affirmative obligation to provide the only Orthodox Jewish prisoner with a rabbi); see also Johnson v. Moore, 948 F.2d 517, 520 (9th Cir.1991) (per curiam) (holding that failure to provide Unitarian Univer-sali…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Davis v. Powell
Prisons need not provide identical treatment to different faiths, but they must make a “ ‘good faith accommodation of the [prisoners’] rights in light of practical considerations.’” Id. (alteration in original) (quoting Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Antonetti v. Skolnik
Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir.1987) (citing Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. at 89-91, 107 S.Ct. 2254 ).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ward v. Rabideau
In Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir. 1987), we concluded that a “prison administration is not under an affirmative duty to provide each inmate with the spiritual counselor of his choice.” Accord Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 , 322 n. 2, 92 S.Ct. 1079 , 31 L.Ed.2d 263 (1972) (dicta).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Shepard v. PERYAM
(3×)
also: Cited "see"
Rather, an institution must make a “good faith accommodation of the [inmate/prisoner’s] rights in light of practical considerations.” See Freeman v. Arpaio, 125 F.3d 732, 737 (9 Cir.1997); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9 Cir.1987) (citing Gittlemacker v. Prasse, 428 F.2d 1, 4 (3 Cir.1970)).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Rouser v. White
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See, e.g., Ward v. Walsh, 1 F.3d 873, 880 (9th Cir.1993); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (1987); Johnson-Bey v. Lane, 863 F.2d 1308, 1310 (7th Cir.1988); see also Defs.’ Mot. for Summ.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jesus Christ Prison Ministry v. California Department of Corrections
Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir.1987) (citing Turner, 482 U.S. at 89-91 , 107 S.Ct. 2254 ).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Logan v. Lewis
(2×)
See Cruz, 405 U.S. at 322 n. 2; Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
ca9 1997
Prisons need not provide identical facilities or personnel to different faiths, see id. at 322 n. 2, 92 S.Ct. at 1081 n. 2, but must make "good faith accommodation of the [prisoners'] rights in light of practical considerations." Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987) (citing Gittlemacker v. Prasse, 428 F.2d 1, 4 (3d Cir.1970)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Freeman v. Arpaio
Prisons need not provide identical facilities or personnel to different faiths, see id. at 322 n. 2, 92 S.Ct. at 1081 n. 2, but must make “good faith accommodation of the [prisoners’] rights in light of practical considerations.” Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987) (citing Gittlemacker v. Prasse, 428 F.2d 1, 4 (3d Cir.1970)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Akbar v. Gomez
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Even taken as true, this allegation does not raise a genuine issue of whether plaintiffs' equal protection rights were violated because equal protection guarantees a prisoner only "a reasonable opportunity of pursuing his faith comparable to the opportunity afforded fellow prisoners who adhere to conventional religious precepts." Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 568 (9th Cir.1987) (quoting Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319, 322 (1972) (per curiam)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Thompson v. Souza
Though all our prior decisions employing the Turner ... analysis have involved infringements of inmates’ [F]irst [Ajmendment rights, Reimers v. Oregon, 846 F.2d 561 (9th Cir.1988) (free exercise); McElyea v. Babbitt, 833 F.2d 196, 197 (9th Cir.1987) (same); Standing Deer v. Carlson, 831 F.2d 1525, 1528-29 (9th Cir.1987) (same); McCabe v. Arave, 827 F.2d 634, 637-38 (9th Cir.1987) (free exercise and speech); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567-68 (9th Cir.1987) (free exercise), as w[as] ...
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
ca9 1997
Though all our prior decisions employing the Turner ... analysis have involved infringements of inmates' [F]irst [A]mendment rights, Reimers v. Oregon, 846 F.2d 561 (9th Cir.1988) (free exercise); McElyea v. Babbitt, 833 F.2d 196, 197 (9th Cir.1987) (same); Standing Deer v. Carlson, 831 F.2d 1525, 1528-29 (9th Cir.1987) (same); McCabe v. Arave, 827 F.2d 634, 637-38 (9th Cir.1987) (free exercise and speech); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567-68 (9th Cir.1987) (free exercise), as w[as] ...
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Jason McKinley Ward v. Jessie Walsh, Associate Warden of Programs
In Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987), we concluded that a “prison administration is not under an affirmative duty to provide each inmate with the spiritual counselor of his choice.” Accord Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 , 322 n. 2, 92 S.Ct. 1079 , 1081 n. 2, 31 L.Ed.2d 263 (1972) (dicta).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Andre Brigham Young v. Richard J. Thompson, Director, Department of Social and Health Services David Weston
(3×)
also: Cited "see"
Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319, 321-22 (1972) (per curiam); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 566 (9th Cir.1987).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Keith Alan Robbins v. M. Errol Grant, Senior Chaplain
Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir.1987) 2 To the extent Robbins's opening brief can be construed as raising the claim that prison officials violated his first amendment right to free exercise of religion by not giving him a strict vegetarian diet, it does not appear that this issue was ever properly presented or considered by the district court.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Frost v. Agnos
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir.1987). 8 Here, the prison policy prohibiting close custody inmates, who constitute the greatest security risk, from attending congregate religious services is logically connected to the legitimate penological interests of security and safety.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Terry Bishop v. Ron Angelone John Iganicio Carroll Ployher
In order to satisfy equal protection, "an inmate who is an adherent of a minority religion must be afforded 'a reasonable opportunity of pursuing his faith comparable to the opportunity afforded fellow prisoners who adhere to conventional religious precepts.' " Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987) (citing Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319, 322 (1972)). 5 Here, Bishop alleged that prison officials violated his right to freedom of religion and equal protection by denying him, and other African-Americans, Islamic religious services, specifically Jumah prayer services, religious materials, a…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Martin Allen Johnson v. Robert Moore, Superintendent, Clallam Bay Corrections Center
While it is clear that inmates retain First Amendment protections, we have previously held that the Constitution does not necessarily require prisons “to provide each inmate with the spiritual counselor of his choice.” Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
C.D. Mosier v. Gary Maynard, D.O.C. Dan Reynolds, Warden
See generally Al-Alamin v. Gramley, 926 F.2d 680, 688 (7th Cir.1991); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 568-69 (9th Cir.1987).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Martin Allen Johnson v. Robert Moore, Superintendent, Clallam Bay Corrections Center
While it is clear that inmates retain first amendment protections, we have previously held that the Constitution does not necessarily require prisons “to provide each inmate with the spiritual counselor of his choice.” Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
ca7 1991
See, e.g., Johnson-Bey v. Lane, 863 F.2d 1308, 1312 (7th Cir.1988) (noting only that prison's provision of clergy for some religions and not others is "troubling" but nevertheless acceptable "to the extent required by the exigencies of prison administration"); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 568-69 (9th Cir.1987) (inmates had reasonable opportunity to practice their religion when prison officials permitted weekly access by volunteer clergy, when available); Thompson, 712 F.2d at 1080-81 (failure to provide Muslim leader at state expense not actionable under first amendment).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Young v. Lane
See, e.g., Johnson-Bey v. Lane, 863 F.2d 1308, 1312 (7th Cir.1988) (noting only that prison’s provision of clergy for some religions and not others is “troubling” but nevertheless acceptable “to the extent required by the exigencies of prison administration”); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 568-69 (9th Cir.1987) (inmates had reasonable opportunity to practice their religion when prison officials permitted weekly access by volunteer clergy, when available); Thompson , 712 F.2d at 1080-81 (failure to provide Muslim leader at state expense not actionable under first amendment).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Robert R. Reimers v. State of Oregon
Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987); Gittlemacker v. Prasse, 428 F.2d 1, 4 (3d Cir.1970).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ronnie Johnson-Bey, John Lee Lipscomb-Bey, and Reginald Morgan-Bey, Cross-Appellees v. Michael P. Lane, Cross-Appellants
See, e.g., Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 , 107 S.Ct. 2254 , 96 L.Ed.2d 64 (1987); Reed v. Faulkner, 842 F.2d 960, 962 (7th Cir.1988); Mumin v. Phelps, 857 F.2d 1055 (5th Cir.1988); Standing Deer v. Carlson, 831 F.2d 1525, 1528-29 (9th Cir.1987); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567 (9th Cir.1987).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Robert Michenfelder v. George Sumner Lieutenant Koon C/o Horn C/o Leslie Sgt Jenae Holmes Sgt Stuffelbeam James Parker
Though all our prior decisions employing the Turner O’Lone analysis have involved infringements of inmates’ first amendment rights, Reimers v. Oregon, 846 F.2d 561 (9th Cir.1988) (free exercise); McElyea v. Babbitt, 833 F.2d 196, 197 (9th Cir.1987) (same); Standing Deer v. Carlson, 831 F.2d 1525, 1528-29 (9th Cir.1987) (same); McCabe v. Arave, 827 F.2d 634, 637-38 (9th Cir.1987) (free exercise and speech); Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 567-68 (9th Cir.1987) (free exercise), as were both Turner v. Safley and O’Lone v. Estate of Shabazz, we believe that Turner v. Safley’s suggested fact…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Card v. Dugger
The plaintiffs noted that “Catholic and Protestant DSU inmates can obtain spiritual guidance immediately upon request because the state provides full-time chaplains of those denominations on the prison premises.” Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 568 (9th Cir.1987).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Robert R. Reimers v. State of Oregon
Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir.1987); Gittlemacker v. Prasse, 428 F.2d 1, 4 (3d Cir.1970).
discussed
Cited "see"
Frye
See Allen v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 569 (9th Cir. 1987) (citation omitted) (observing that prisoners not entitled to have clergyman of his choice provided in prison); Payne v. Lucas, No. 6:12-1904-DCN-KFM, 2012 WL 4847124 , at *7 (D.S.C.
discussed
Cited "see"
Collett v. Mason County
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Reimers v. State of Or., 12 863 F.2d 630, 632 (9th Cir. 1988) (“[A] prisoner is not entitled to have the clergyman of his 13 choice provided for him in the prison.”) (citing Allen, 827 F.2d at 569 and Gittlemacker v. 14 Prasse, 428 F.2d 1, 4 (3d Cir.1970)). 15 Accordingly, County Defendants have shown no genuine issue of fact remains as to 16 whether the alleged refusal to provide a paid religious advisor for Plaintiff’s faith imposed a 17 substantial burden on his religious expression, and Plaintiff has failed to rebut their showing. 18 Therefore, the Court concludes County Defendan…
discussed
Cited "see"
Sprouse v. Ryan
The Equal Protection Clause entitles each prisoner to "a reasonable opportunity of pursuing his faith comparable to the opportunity afforded fellow prisoners who adhere *1362 to conventional religious precepts." Cruz v. Beto , 405 U.S. 319 , 322, 92 S.Ct. 1079 , 31 L.Ed.2d 263 (1972) (providing that Buddhist prisoners must be given opportunity to pursue faith comparable to that given Christian prisoners); see Allen v. Toombs , 827 F.2d 563 , 569 (9th Cir. 1987) (the Equal Protection Clause requires prison officials to make "good faith accommodations of the prisoner's rights in light of practic…
discussed
Cited "see"
Randy Haight v. LaDonna Thompson
(2×)
See Allen, 827 F.2d at 565-66 & n. 5 (describing sweat lodge used weekly at a maximum-security prison in Oregon); Native Am.
INUPIAT COMMUNITY OF THE ARCTIC SLOPE, a Federally Recognized Indian Tribe, and Ukpeagvik Inupiat Corporation, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
82-3678.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Sep 4, 1987.
Ziontz, Pirtle, Morisset, Emstoff & Chestnut, Mason D. Morisset, Seattle, Wash., for plaintiffs-appellants., Kathryn A. Oberly, Asst, to the Sol. Gen., Brice M. Clagett, Covington & Bur-, ling, Washington D.C., R. Collin Middleton, Baenen, Timme De Reitzes & Middletown, Anchorage, Alaska, for defendants-appellees.
Browning, Hug, Reed.
Published
ORDER
This court is required by Federated Department Stores v. Moitie, 452 U.S. 394, 101 S.Ct. 2424, 69 L.Ed.2d 103 (1981), to deny Appellant’s motion to vacate judgment, recall mandate and consolidate with Amoco Production Company v. Village of Gambell, Nos. 83-3735, 83-3781 and 85-3877. Appellants’ situation results from the Supreme Court’s denial of their petition for a writ of certiorari, and their remedy must be sought in that court. See Gondeck v. Pan Am. World Airways, 382 U.S. 25, 86 S.Ct. 153, 15 L.Ed.2d 21 (1965) (per curiam).