Sherman Miller v. Michael Dukakis, Etc.

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 FLSA does not apply to a civil detainee committed as a sexually dangerous person under Massachusetts law
• holding that prison’s hair grooming regulations did not unlawfully violate inmates’ First Amendment rights
• concluding at the judgment-on-the-pleadings stage that there were no unfair-competition concerns because “the Treatment Center does not operate in the marketplace and has no business competitors”
• rejecting application of the FLSA to “sexually dangerous persons” who work at the institution because it would not further the FLSA’s purposes
• rejecting Due Process claim of patient who had voluntarily committed himself to care of Department of Mental Health
• rejecting the argument that sexually dangerous civil detainees should be regarded as “patients” rather than “prisoners” for the purposes of the FLSA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).