COREY HURST v. BRUCE THOMPSON

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that plaintiff failed to provide in his complaint sufficient factual support to “rebut the Gaubert presumption that the decisions by prison officials regarding his safety were based upon BOP policy”
• holding that, where a directive sets forth broad objectives but “does not specifically prescribe a course of action for prison officials to follow,” officials have discretion on how to accomplish the objectives
• explaining that implementation of 28 C.F.R. § 541.23 is left to discretion of Bureau of Prisons
• explaining that implementation of 28 C.F.R. § 541.23 is left to discretion of Bureau of Prisons
• finding that a mandatory duty may still invite discretion if it “is of a general nature” and “does not specifically prescribe a course of action”
• explaining that implementation of 28 C.F.R. § 541.23 is left to discretion of Bureau of Prisons

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).