Richard John Freitas, Sr., Appellee/cross-Appellant v. John Ault, Appellant/cross-Appellee, and Irene G. Howard, Defendant/cross-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that inmate’s “loss of a higher-paying job and other privilege” did not “constitute[] an atypical hardship”
• holding that thirty days of limited visitors and no phone privileges did not constitute an atypical and significant hardship
• holding that “welcome and voluntary sexual interactions, no matter how inappropriate, cannot as matter of law constitute ‘pain’ as contemplated by the Eighth Amendment”
• finding that an involuntary transfer to a higher-security facility and loss of work and phone privileges did not constitute atypical and significant hardship
• finding that an involuntary transfer to a higher-security facility and loss of work and phone privileges did not constitute atypical and significant hardship
• finding that an involuntary transfer to a higher- security facility and loss of work and phone privileges did not constitute atypical and significant hardship

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).