Arnold v. South Carolina Department of Corrections

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that kitchen supervisors’ knowledge of faulty condition of steam pot, and their failure to repair it, was not sufficient to establish that officials acted with an attitude of deliberate indifference
• finding that, despite use of phrase “deliberate indifference” in his pleadings, inmate failed to show that defendants possessed the requisite mental state
• finding that, despite use of phrase “deliberate indifference” in his pleadings, inmate failed to show that defendants possessed the requisite mental state
• indicating that it is questionable whether the Eighth Amendment applies to work-related prison injuries
• indicating that it is questionable whether the Eighth Amendment applies to work-related prison injuries
• stating that “extend[ing] civil liability under the constitutional proscription against cruel and unusual punishment to improperly functioning kitchen equipment . . . . would give constitutional recognition to run-of-the-mill negligence actions” (cleaned up)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).