28 C.F.R. § 542.12
[Reserved]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1986–2021 · leading case: Dan S. Hessbrook v. M.C. Lennon, Jr., D.A. French, & J. Saxman, 777 F.2d 999 (5th Cir. 1986).
Dan S. Hessbrook v. M.C. Lennon, Jr., D.A. French, & J. Saxman, 777 F.2d 999 (5th Cir. 1986). “” 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 . We think, however, that appellant misconstrues the scope of this prohibition.”
Douglas Nyhuis v. Janet Reno, Attorney Gen. Eric Holder, Deputy Attorney Gen. Kathleen Hawk, Dir.-Bop John Hahn, Warden, 204 F.3d 65 (3rd Cir. 2000). “Nyhuis has requested money damages and declaratory relief, which are not available from the Bureau of Prisons, see 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 (b) (1999); see also BOP Program Statement 1330.”
United States v. McAllister, 969 F. Supp. 1200 (D. Minnesota 1997). “But those procedures are available only “except as excluded in” 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 . “Requests or Appeals will not be accepted under the Administrative Remedy Program for claims for which other administrative procedures have been established____” 28 C.”
Lunsford v. Jumao-As, 155 F.3d 1178 (9th Cir. 1998). “2d 686 (1988); 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 (b). Therefore, we VACATE the district court’s order dismissing Lunsford’s complaint and denying his application to proceed in fo?ma pauperis, and REMAND this case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this order.”
Garrett v. Hawk, 127 F.3d 1263 (10th Cir. 1997). “See 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 (b) (1997); see also BOP Program Statement 1330.”
Sallee v. Joyner, 40 F. Supp. 2d 766 (E.D. Va. 1999). “1997) (citing 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 ). 2 . President Clinton vetoed H.”
Fernando Bustillo v. Art Beeler, 495 F. App'x 343 (4th Cir. 2012). “See 28 C.F.R. §§ 542.12 to .15 (2012); Moore v.”
McCarthy v. Madigan, 503 U.S. 140 (1992). “" See 28 CFR § 542.12 (1991). The Bureau of Prisons has interpreted this "tort claims" exception to include claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, but not constitutional claims for relief recognized under the Bivens case.”
Gibson v. Matthews, 715 F. Supp. 181 (E.D. Ky. 1989). “” 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 . The plaintiffs claim regarding the alleged violation of federal regulations by the defendants, in the opinion of the court, is in the nature of a tort.”
Campbell v. Chaves, 402 F. Supp. 2d 1101 (D. Ariz. 2005). “” 28 C.F.R. 542.12 (2001). Saf-ford-FCI staff provided the Plaintiff with the form for filing the FTCA claim.”
Lewis v. Sims (S.D. Ind. 2020). “28 C.F.R. § 542.12 (a). Unfortunately for Mr.”
Barragan v. Knight (D.S.C. 2021). “Third, he must appeal the warden’s decision to the Regional Director within twenty days; and fourth, he must appeal to the Central Office.”
— 28 C.F.R. § 542.12(b) — 1 case
Campbell v. Chaves, 402 F. Supp. 2d 1101 (D. Ariz. 2005). “” 28 C.F.R. 542.12 (2001). Saf-ford-FCI staff provided the Plaintiff with the form for filing the FTCA claim.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.