Jerry Young Also Known as Ramadan, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Richard Hoffman, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the prisoner-plaintiff “was ultimately afforded his due process protections” because the administrative reversal of his disciplinary proceedings “cured any procedural defect that may have occurred”
• determining that administrative appeals process cures due process deficiency in original disciplinary hearing
• declining to address whether prisoner suffered any denial of due process, since prisoner’s administrative appeal resulted in a reversal of his disciplinary sentence before he served any of the sentence, thus curing any procedural defect
• procedural safeguards are only applicable when “ ‘there exists a liberty or property interest which has been interfered with by the State.’ ”
• “the administrative reversal constituted part of the due process protection [the inmate] received, and it cured any procedural defect that may have occurred”
• “administrative reversal constituted part of the due process protection [inmate] received, and it cured any procedural defect that may have occurred”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).