District of Columbia· 10/21/2011
Burke v. Lappin
Citations
- 821 F. Supp. 2d 244
- 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121909
- 2011 WL 5024197
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- explaining that “[a]ny new claims arising from plaintiff’s conditions of confinement at USP Lewisburg are properly brought in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania after he has exhausted his administrative remedies”
- dismissing complaint when Plaintiff did not \allege[ ] sufficient facts for which the current and former high-level officials at BOP headquarters may be held liable\
- dismissing complaint when Plaintiff did not “allege[] sufficient facts for which the current and former high-level officials at BOP headquarters may be held liable”
- dismissing similar Bivens claims against the BOP director and other officials
- “[Plaintiff’s] recent transfer from FCI Talladega renders his claims for injunctive and declaratory relief moot.”
- “To be held liable under Bivens, the official must have participated per- sonally in the alleged wrongdoing.” (citing Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 676)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Barroca v. HurwitzD.C. Circuit· 2018-09-28· cited 6×
- Munn Bey v. Department of CorrectionsDistrict of Columbia· 2011-03-16· cited 5×
- Dial v. KaneD.C. Circuit· 2018-05-30· cited 4×
- Chun-Yu Zhao v. HolderDistrict of Columbia· 2012-09-12
- Munn Bey v. Department of CorrectionsDistrict of Columbia· 2012-03-16
- Reid v. SamuelsDistrict of Columbia· 2016-11-08
- Dial v. KaneDistrict of Columbia· 2018-05-30
- Barroca v. SamuelsDistrict of Columbia· 2018-09-28
- Doe v. SessionsDistrict of Columbia· 2018-12-12
- Mitchell v. JohnsonDistrict of Columbia· 2021-04-30
- Gillens v. CarvajalDistrict of Columbia· 2023-09-13
- Crum v. CsosaDistrict of Columbia· 2025-04-18
Cites
17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court· 2009-05-18· cited 149,772×
- Porter v. NussleSupreme Court· 2002-02-26· cited 4,960×
- Federal Deposit Insurance v. MeyerSupreme Court· 1994-02-23· cited 4,884×
- United States v. MitchellSupreme Court· 1983-06-27· cited 3,342×
- Davis v. PassmanSupreme Court· 1979-06-05· cited 3,039×
- Correctional Services Corp. v. MaleskoSupreme Court· 2001-11-27· cited 1,854×
- United States v. Nordic Village, Inc.Supreme Court· 1992-02-25· cited 1,691×
- Bush v. LucasSupreme Court· 1983-06-13· cited 1,430×
- James Cameron v. Richard Thornburgh, Attorney GeneralD.C. Circuit· 1993-01-22· cited 272×
- Arkan Ali v. Donald RumsfeldD.C. Circuit· 2011-06-21· cited 172×
- Webman v. Federal Bureau of PrisonsD.C. Circuit· 2006-03-28· cited 79×
- Epps v. U.S. Attorney GeneralDistrict of Columbia· 2008-09-08· cited 55×
- Marshall v. RenoDistrict of Columbia· 1996-02-01· cited 37×
- Gonzalez v. HolderDistrict of Columbia· 2011-02-08· cited 26×
- Thomas v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia· 2011-04-29· cited 10×
- Dancy v. Department of the ArmyDistrict of Columbia· 1995-09-01· cited 6×
- POULLARD v. Federal Bureau of PrisonsDistrict of Columbia· 2008-03-06· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.