Adames v. Perez

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “the plaintiff can produce circumstantial evidence that the risk to inmate health or safety was so longstanding and pervasive that the official must have been aware of this danger”
• holding that negligence is insufficient to support a finding of liability under § 1983
• noting that “an individual who divulges secret information about his gang might be a target of violence by fellow gang members”
• holding failure to file a post-verdict motion waives a sufficiency claim, limiting court to a review for plain error
• concluding that testimony evidencing three instances of inmates escaping their cells did not shed any light on whether prison officials were subjectively aware of a substantial risk of harm to an inmate at the hands of another inmate who had escaped his cell
• applying a plain error standard of review and holding no evidence supported the jury’s finding

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).