Foster v. Runnels

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a denial of sixteen meals over twenty-three days was sufficiently serious “because food is one of life’s basic necessities”
• holding that depriving an inmate 17 of 16 meals over the course of 23 days could give rise to an Eighth Amendment 18 claim
• holding that the magnitude of the risk must be “so 7 obvious that [the defendant] must have been subjectively aware of it”
• holding that the magnitude of the risk must be “so 3 obvious that [the defendant] must have been subjectively aware of it”
• holding that denial of meals on two isolated occasions did not implicate Eighth Amendment violation
• holding that a denial of 16 meals over 23 days was sufficiently serious “because food is one of life’s basic necessities”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).