Assertion: conquistador | /r/CapableOf | allege fact
Facets:
Source sentences:
text: To state a claim for deliberate indifference to safety or failure to protect from harm, Conquistador must allege facts satisfying two elements.
text: To state a retaliation claim, Conquistador must allege facts showing that (1), he engaged in protected speech or conduct; "(2) that the defendant took adverse action against the plaintiff, and (3) that there was a causal connection between the protected speech and the adverse action.
text: To state a claim for use of excessive force, Conquistador must allege facts showing that, subjectively, the defendants acted maliciously or sadistically to cause harm rather than in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore discipline.
text: To state a retaliation claim, Conquistador must allege facts showing: (1) that he engaged in speech or conduct that was protected; "(2) that the defendant took adverse action against the plaintiff, and (3) that there was a causal connection between the protected speech and the adverse action.
text: To satisfy the objective component of the test, Conquistador must allege facts showing that the conditions of confinement deprived him of a "basis human needs," such as "food, clothing, medical care, and reasonable safety.
text: Section 1983 does not abrogate state sovereign immunity, Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 343 (1979), and Conquistador has alleged no facts suggesting that Connecticut has waived this immunity.
text: Although Conquistador alleges no facts suggesting that any defendant acknowledged a relationship between the lawsuit and the use of force, based on temporal proximity, the court will permit the retaliation claim to proceed at this time against Captain Syed and Officer Alleyne only.
text: Section 1983 does not abrogate state sovereign immunity, Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 343 (1979), and Conquistador has alleged no facts suggesting that Connecticut has waived this immunity.