Source: http://www.savecoalition.org/references.html
Timestamp: 2017-02-26 15:28:23
Document Index: 57954181

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1997', '§ 1997', '§ 1997', '§ 1997', '§ 1997', '§ 1997', '§ 1997', '§ 1997', '§ 1997']

SAVE Coalition - References
REFERENCES : 1. Hancock v. Payne, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1648 (S.D. Miss. Jan. 4, 2006) (42 U.S. C. § 1997e(e)). This case was decided at summary judgment, which means that all facts are assumed in favor of the plaintiffs, but there were no findings of fact because the suit was dismissed prior to trial.
2. Minix v. Pazera, 2005 WL 1799538, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10913 (N.D. Ind. July 27, 2005) (42 U.S. C. § 1997e(a)). This case was decided at summary judgment, which means that all facts are assumed in favor of the plaintiff, but there were no findings of fact because the suit was dismissed prior to trial.
3. Panaro v. City of North Las Vegas, 432 F.3d 949 (9th Cir. 2005) (42 U.S. C. § 1997e(a)). This case was decided at summary judgment, which means that all facts are assumed in favor of the plaintiff, but there were no findings of fact because the suit was dismissed prior to trial.
4. Davis v. District of Columbia, 158 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (42 U.S. C. § 1997e(e)). This case was decided at summary judgment, which means that all facts are assumed in favor of the plaintiff, but there were no findings of fact because the suit was dismissed prior to trial.
5. Alexander v. Tippah County, 351 F.3d 626 (5th Cir. 2003) (42 U.S. C. § 1997e(e)). This case was decided at summary judgment, which means that all facts are assumed in favor of the plaintiffs, but there are no findings of fact because the suit was dismissed prior to trial.
6. Jarriet v. Wilson, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 13661 (6th Cir. July 7, 2005) (42 U.S. C. § 1997e (e)).This case was decided at summary judgment, which means that all facts are assumed in favor of the plaintiff, but there are no findings of fact because the suit was dismissed prior to trial.
7. Trevino v. Johnson, 2005 WL 3360252 (E. D. Tex., Dec. 8, 2005) (42 U.S. C. § 1997e(e)). This case was decided after a preliminary evidentiary hearing.
8. Moya v. City of Albuquerque, No. 96-1257 DJS/RLP, Mem. Op. and Order (D.N.M. Nov. 17, 1997) (42 U.S. C. § 1997e(e)). This case was decided after all evidence was presented at trial and the judge entered a judgment as a matter of law.
9. Pearson v. Wellborn, 471 F.3d 732 (7th Cir. 2006) (42 U.S. C. § 1997e(e)). These facts were decided by a jury, after trial.
10. Searles v. Van Bebber, 251 F.3d 869 (10th Cir. 2001). These facts were decided by a jury, after a trial.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT (202) 548-6608