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, and J. Saxman
Dan S. Hessbrook v. M.C. Lennon, Jr., D.A. French, and J. Saxman (1986)
“” 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 . We think, however, that appellant misconstrues the scope of this prohibition.”
Douglas Nyhuis v. Janet Reno, Attorney General Eric Holder, Deputy Attorney General Kathleen Hawk, Director-Bop John Hah (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 (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 (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 (1997)
“See 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 (b) (1997); see also BOP Program Statement 1330.”
Sallee v. Joyner (1999)
“1997) (citing 28 C.F.R. § 542.12 ). 2 . President Clinton vetoed H.”
Fernando Bustillo v. Art Beeler (2012)
“See 28 C.F.R. §§ 542.12 to .15 (2012); Moore v.”
McCarthy v. Madigan (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 (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 (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 (2020)
“28 C.F.R. § 542.12 (a). Unfortunately for Mr.”
Barragan v. Knight (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 (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.