Ponder v. Lexington & Eastern Railway Co.

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 failure “to receive one’s preferred . . . treatment program is neither related to freedom from restraint nor an atypical and significant hardship”
• granting summary judgment on inmate’s equal protection claim for denial of MAT when inmate could not show other similarly situated prisoners had been enrolled in treatment
• “bare conjecture cannot suffice to bar entry of summary judgment” where plaintiff failed to provide evidence in support of his claims
• a doctor’s decision not to refer a plaintiff to an outside specialist or perform certain tests rested “firmly within her medical discretion” and was not actionable as an Eighth Amendment violation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).