green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
16.3 score
“we have said that solitary confinement does not, in itself, violate the eighth amendment”
Treatment trajectory · 1973 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1973
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 24 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Ernest Porter v. Pennsylvania Department of Cor
we have said that solitary confinement does not, in itself, violate the eighth amendment
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Henry Washington v. James Grace
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1202 (3d Cir.1973). 7 The damage and destruction to his religious literature that he describes does not violate the RLUIPA, because he has not shown that these actions “substantially] burden[ed]” his religious practice, see Washington v. Klem, 497 F.3d 272, 280 (3d Cir.2007); moreover, to the extent that he requested money damages for RLUIPA violations, such relief is barred by the recent holding in Sossamon v. Texas, — U.S.-,-, -, 131 S.Ct. 1651, 1660, 1663 , 179 L.Ed.2d 700 (2011) (concluding that “States, in accepting federal funding, do not consen…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bass v. Carroll
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1202 (3d Cir.1973) (stating conditions such as inadequate heating in an inmate’s cell and an inmate’s constant confinement to his cell except for meals, showers, and short exercise periods, do not present the extreme type of conditions required to establish an Eighth Amendment violation).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States Ex Rel. Smith v. Robinson
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1200-01 (3d Cir. 1973).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Pugh v. Internal Revenue Service
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1201 (3d Cir. 1973); Marshall v. Brierly, 461 F.2d *352 929, 930 (3d Cir. 1972); Stanley v. Veterans Administration, 454 F.Supp. 9, 11 (E.D.Pa.1978).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Imprisoned Citizens Union v. Shapp
(3×)
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1202 (3d Cir. 1973).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Stanley v. Veterans Administration
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1201 (3d Cir. 1973); Marshall v. Brierley, 461 F.2d 929, 930 (3d Cir. 1972).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Imprisoned Citizens Union v. Shapp
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1202 (3d Cir. 1973).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
LeGrande v. Redman
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1200-1201 (C.A. 3, 1973); Ford v. Board of Managers of New Jersey State Prison, 407 F.2d 937 , 940 (C.A. 3, 1969).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
MacK v. Johnson
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197 (3d Cir. 1973), when the Court noted that Gray requires that Tyrrell’s transfer to punitive segregation by the Superintendent of Graterford or a warden of the *1145 Delaware County Prison be based, after hearing, on “facts rationally determined.” Id., at 1203. (a) Opportunity to explain his actions Plaintiff does not dispute the fact that he was given written notice, prior to the hearing, of the charges lodged against him, or that the hearings were, in fact, held.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Scott v. Plante
Tyrrell v. Speaker, supra at 1202; Sostre v. McGinnis, 442 F.2d 178 (2d Cir.) cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1049 , 92 S.Ct. 719 , 30 L.Ed.2d 740 (1971); Wright v. McMann, 387 F.2d 519 (2d Cir. 1967); Knuckles v. Prasse, 302 F.Supp. 1036 (E.D.Pa.1969).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Controlled Metals, Inc. v. Non-Ferrous International Corp.
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1200 (3d Cir. 1973). 1 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Salvadore Rotolo v. The Borough of Charleroi (Two Cases)
(2×)
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1200 (3d Cir. 1973); Gray v. Creamer, 465 F.2d 179 (3d Cir. 1972).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Main Road, an Unincorporated Association, by Grady Dyches v. Louis S. Aytch, Superintendent, Philadelphia Prisons. Appeal of Franklyn X. Prillerman
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1201 (3d Cir. 1973); Gray v. Creamer, 465 F.2d 179, 183 (3d Cir. 1972); Collins v. Schoonfield, 344 F.Supp. 257 (D.Md.1972); Cf. Gittlemacker v. Prasse, 428 F.2d 1, 3-4 (3d Cir. 1970). 10 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Tyrrell v. Taylor
(2×)
The Third Circuit apparently agrees with us on this point since it remanded so that we could determine at trial “whether or not Tyrrell’s rights under the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments have been violated.” 471 F.2d at 1204. 3 .
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Houchin v. Holmes
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 3d Cir., 471 F.2d 1197, 1202 (1973); United States ex rel.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jordon v. Keve
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1203 (C.A. 3, 1973).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Gray v. Creamer
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1201 (3d Cir. 1973).” On the basis of Biagiarelli , it must be concluded that plaintiffs’ rights to procedural due process have not been infringed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Newsome v. Sielaff
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1200-1201 (3d Cir. 1973); Gray v. Creamer, 465 F.2d 179, 181-182 (3d Cir. 1972), and such complaints are to be liberally construed by reviewing courts.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bauer v. Sielaff
(2×)
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1202 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, Milam v. Reading & Bates Offshore Drilling Co., 411 U.S. 921 , 93 S.Ct. 1550 , 36 L.Ed.2d 314 (1973), the Court went on to find that inadequate heating in the cell and the fact that while in punitive segregation for eight months, Tyrrell was allowed out only for meals, showers and short exercise periods, did not present the extreme type of conditions required to establish an Eighth Amendment violation.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Braxton v. Carlson
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1203 (3d Cir. 1973), that a transfer to punitive segregation must "be based, after hearing, on 'facts rationally determined."' Although we dealt solely with claims of state prisoners in Gray and Tyrrell, we see no reason why the principles we stated therein would not be applicable to federal prisoners. 14 In the present case, appellants Monyea, Braxton, Staple, McLean and Craig were disciplined with terms of segregated confinement varying from five days to two months.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Braxton v. Carlson
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1203 (3d Cir. 1973), that a transfer to punitive segregation must “be based, after hearing, on ‘facts rationally determined.’ ” Although we dealt solely with-claims of state prisoners in Gray and Tyrrell , we see no reason why the principles we stated therein would not be applicable to. federal prisoners.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Peter Joseph Biagiarelli, in No. 72-2139 v. Allyn R. Sielaff, Commissioner of Corrections, in 72-2138
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, 1201 (3d Cir. 1973).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Hamilton v. Jamieson
Tyrrell v. Speaker, 471 F.2d 1197, at 1204 (3d Cir. 1973).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
T. W. MILAM and Carrie G. Milam, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
READING & BATES OFFSHORE DRILLING COMPANY, Amoco Production Company, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
v.
READING & BATES OFFSHORE DRILLING COMPANY, Amoco Production Company, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
72-3081.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Apr 2, 1973.
471 F.2d 1197
J. B. Jones, Jr., Cameron, La., for plaintiffs-appellants., J. Y. Gilmore, Jr., New Orleans, La., for defendants-appellees.
Bell, Dyer, Clark.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
PER CURIAM:
The factual situation and the legal issues presented in this case are in all material respects identical to those in Futch v. Midland Enterprises, Inc., 471 F.2d 1195 (1972), decided today.
On June 30, 1964, Arnold Milam, a motorman aboard the seagoing drilling barge C. P. Baker, was killed when a “blowout” caused that vessel to burn and' sink in the Gulf of Mexico. Elvie Milam, the decedent’s widow and Administratrix of his estate, compromised and settled all claims arising from the death of her husband for consideration of 47,500 dollars. Some eight years later, in 1972, this action, predicated on the decision of Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc., 398 U.S. 375, 90 S.Ct. 1772, 26 L.Ed.2d 339 (1970), was filed by Arnold L. Milam’s parents, T. W. Milam and Carey Milam. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants.
For the reasons discussed in our opinion in Futch, supra, we hold decedent’s parents have no standing to bring this action. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is
Affirmed.