Roy Burns v. Edward Eaton

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the defendant “deployed a small amount of pepper spray” with a “2 to 3 second blast”
• concluding the prison guard “no longer faced the relatively simple task of cuffing Burns and escorting him back to his cell. [The guard] now faced a recalcitrant inmate.”
• noting undisputed facts describing the use of pepper spray on a recalcitrant inmate did not suggest “a complete absence of penological purpose”
• finding improper exhaustion when the “ADC was not asked to evaluate the conduct” of the defendant “or the distinct § 1983 claims first asserted” in the lawsuit
• finding no Eighth Amendment violation where the inmate, who was aggressive and threatening toward a prison guard, was warned he would be pepper sprayed if he did not “catch the cuffs”
• recounting undisputed facts in summary judgment record describing the recalcitrant inmate

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).