Office of Lawyer Regulation v. John H. Peiss

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 use of pepper spray was reasonable because the defendant refused multiple orders over several days to leave his cell
• holding that the use of pepper spray was reasonable because the defendant refused multiple orders over several days to leave his cell
• finding no Eighth Amendment claim in part because the prisoner “was promptly offered a shower and medical attention” following the pepper spray
• “My placement on [administrative segregation] for a minor booking in which [I] only received 5 days LOP [loss of privileges] is not justifiable[.]”
• “Conclusory allegations that Dobson structures companies to 17 escape liability are insufficient to confer personal jurisdiction. Something more is 18 needed.”
• in order to prevail on the causation prong, plaintiff must show “a substantial or motivating factor for the adverse [action].” (quoting Padilla- García v. Rodríguez, 212 F.3d 69, 74 (1st Cir. 2000))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).