Rivera v. Goord

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that particular defendants’ “alleged acts of retaliation”—“‘shov[ing]’ [the plaintiff] while taking him to the [Special Housing Unit (“SHU”
• finding level of force applied in “aggressive pat frisks” does not rise to a constitutional violation
• finding assault was “adverse action” where defendant “pinned [plaintiff] against a wall, banging his face into the wall and twisting his arms behind him”
• finding allegations that an inmate wrote to prison officials and was ignored insufficient to hold those officials liable under § 1983
• finding assault was “adverse action” where defendant “pinned [plaintiff] against a wall, banging his face into the wall and twisting his arms behind him”
• dismissing retaliation claim where acts complained of—shoving plaintiff while taking him to SHU—were de minimis and not actionable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).