Legal Document

404 U.S. 519 92 Supreme Court Reporter 594 30 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 652 Francis HAINES, Petitioner,v.Otto Judge KERNER, former Governor, State of Illinois, et al. Number 70—5025. Argued Dec. 6, 1971. Decided Jan. 13, 1972. Rehearing Denied Feb. 22, See 405 948, 963. Stanley Atlantic Bass, New York City, for petitioner. Warren K. Smoot, Chicago, Ill., respondents, pro hac vice, by special leave Court. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner, an inmate at the Illinois Penitentiary, Menard, commenced this action against Governor and other state officers prison officials under Civil Rights Act 1871, 17 Statutes-at-Large 42 Code KF62 § 1983, 28 1343(3), seeking to recover damages claimed injuries deprivation rights while incarcerated a judgment not challenged here. Petitioner's se complaint was premised on alleged placing him in solitary confinement as disciplinary measure after he had struck another head with shovel following verbal altercation. The assault petitioner is denied. included general allegations physical suffered denial due process steps leading that confinement. suffering aggravation preexisting foot injury circulatory ailment caused forcing sleep floor his cell only blankets. 2 District granted respondents' motion Rule 12(b)(6) Federal Rules Procedure dismiss failure claim upon which relief could be granted, suggesting exceptional circumstances should courts inquire into internal operations penitentiaries concluding failed show federally protected rights. Appeals affirmed, 427 Reporter, 2nd 71, emphasizing are vested 'wide discretion' matters. We certiorari appointed counsel represent issue now before us petitioner's contention erred dismissing without allowing present evidence claims. 3 Whatever may limits scope inquiry administration prisons, such those asserted petitioner, however inartfully pleaded, sufficient call opportunity offer supporting evidence. cannot say assurance complaint, we hold less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted lawyers, it appears 'beyond doubt plaintiff can prove no set facts support would entitle relief.' Conley versus Gibson, 355 41, 45—46, 78 99, 102, 80 (1957). Dioguardi Durning, 139 774 (CA2 1944). 4 Accordingly, although intimate view whatever merits allegations, conclude entitled proof. reversed case remanded further proceedings consistent herewith. 5 Reversed remanded. 6 Mr. Justice POWELL REHNQUIST took part consideration or decision case.

Classification Label: 0