Jeffrey Whitman v. Veroljub Nesic and Christopher Ellerd

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that harassment or malicious conduct unrelated to institutional security violates Eighth Amendment
• dismissing plaintiff’s argument that “since a district court found his complaint stated a claim under § 1983 at the preliminary stages of the litigation, his complaint must also survive summary judgment”
• “Being made to stand naked twenty minutes as part of a random drug-testing policy is not a ‘sufficiently serious’ condition of confinement to rise to the level of a constitutional violation.
• “[O]nly those searches that are maliciously motivated, unrelated to institutional security, and hence totally without penological justification are considered unconstitutional.”
• “[T]he mere fact that state rules or statutes are violated does not in and of itself amount to a constitutional violation or give rise to an actionable § 1983 claim.”
• strip search of inmate violates Eighth Amendment if it is “maliciously motivated, unrelated to institutional security, and hence totally without penological justification,” and is “conducted in a harassing manner intended to humiliate and inflict psychological pain”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).