Fifth Circuit· 9/23/1998
Martin v. Scott
Citations
- 156 F.3d 578
- 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 23552
- 1998 WL 650992
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that plaintiff's equal protection claim was frivolous where prisoners were not similarly situated
- finding that allegations that a prisoner “became ill after being fed Vita-Pro—a soy-based meat substitute—simply do not rise to the level of cruel and unusual punishment”
- “The plain language of [28 U.S.C. § 1915A] indicates that it applies to any suit by a prisoner against certain government officials or entities regardless of whether that prisoner is or is not proceeding IFP.”
- affirming dismissal of section 1983 suit complaining of administrative segregation
- reviewing dismissal as frivolous under § 1915A
- labeling such a claim \frivolous\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Jolly, Barksdale, Benavides
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
24 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Curley v. PerryTenth Circuit· 2001-04-18· cited 712×
- John Stephen Rowe and Dr. Jeffrey L. Lant v. Michele Shake, Greg Hulse, Craig HanksSeventh Circuit· 1999-12-27· cited 668×
- Harper v. ShowersFifth Circuit· 1999-05-24· cited 457×
- Peter L. Carr v. Jeffrey M. Dvorin, Assistant Nys Attorney GeneralSecond Circuit· 1999-03-18· cited 234×
- Nathenson v. Zonagen Inc.Fifth Circuit· 2001-10-15· cited 231×
- Hernandez v. VelasquezFifth Circuit· 2008-03-28· cited 177×
- Vanderberg v. DonaldsonEleventh Circuit· 2001-08-01· cited 171×
- Plunk v. GivensTenth Circuit· 2000-12-12· cited 60×
- Robert Morris v. Mike McAllesterFifth Circuit· 2012-12-05· cited 32×
- Chavarria v. StacksFifth Circuit· 2004-07-20· cited 17×
- Breakiron v. NealN.D. Texas· 2001-05-08· cited 14×
- Prewitt v. City of GreenvilleFifth Circuit· 1998-12-04· cited 11×
- David v. HillS.D. Texas· 2005-11-16· cited 9×
- Jackson v. MizzelFifth Circuit· 2010-01-20· cited 6×
- Kossie v. CrainS.D. Texas· 2009-04-09· cited 2×
- State Ex Rel. Schatz v. McCaughtryCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin· 2002-06-20· cited 2×
- Pittman v. ConerlyFifth Circuit· 2010-12-23· cited 2×
- Barrow v. Texas Department of Corrections Correctional Industries Manufacturer of Tray/Food Service ManagersFifth Circuit· 2008-03-28· cited 1×
- Munson v. GaetzS.D. Illinois· 2013-07-17· cited 1×
- Texas Department of Criminal Justice v. Edward McElyeaTex. App. Ct., 3rd Dist. (Austin)· 2007-07-26
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Darryl McGore v. Gene L. Wrigglesworth, Chief Sheriff Richard Chinelli, Administrator Ingham County Sheriff's DepartmentSixth Circuit· 1997-06-11· cited 5,495×
- Helling v. McKinneySupreme Court· 1993-06-18· cited 4,262×
- Siglar v. HightowerFifth Circuit· 1997-05-08· cited 630×
- Pichardo v. KinkerFifth Circuit· 1996-01-31· cited 94×
- Vivian Hallmark Middleton, Individually and as Next Friend of Christopher Neil Hallmark v. Reynolds Metals CompanySixth Circuit· 1992-05-29· cited 36×
- John Michael Ricks v. (Nfn) MacKey Lt. Col., Director of Treatment Programs, Usdb Ft. LeavenworthTenth Circuit· 1998-03-25· cited 5×
Other cases named Martin v. Scott
13 other CourtListener records share this case name.
- Martin v. ScottNebraska Supreme Court· 1881-11-15· cited 6×
- Martin v. ScottNinth Circuit· 2002-06-14· cited 2×
- Martin v. ScottSupreme Court of Georgia· 1903-06-01· cited 1×
- Martin v. ScottAlabama Court of Appeals· 1915-06-01· cited 1×
- Martin v. ScottSupreme Court· 2002-11-18
- Martin v. ScottFifth Circuit· 1995-03-23
- Martin v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1941-09-30
- Martin v. ScottSupreme Court· 1994-05-31
- Martin v. ScottSupreme Court· 1995-06-12
- Martin v. ScottSupreme Court· 1995-06-12
- Martin v. ScottSupreme Court· 1999-06-24
- Martin v. ScottSupreme Court· 1999-06-24
- Martin v. ScottSupreme Court· 2002-11-18
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.