Steven J. KELLEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert G. BORG, Defendant-Appellant

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 law 15 was sufficiently clearly established to allow an Eighth Amendment claim for failing to remove 16 inmate from cell where he was exposed to unidentified “fumes” which rendered him unconscious 17 to proceed
• holding that the law 28 was sufficiently clearly established to allow an Eighth Amendment claim for failing to remove 1 inmate from cell where he was exposed to unidentified “fumes” which rendered him unconscious 2 to proceed
• holding that the law was 3 sufficiently clearly established to allow an Eighth Amendment claim for failing to remove inmate 4 from cell where he was exposed to unidentified “fumes” which rendered him unconscious to 5 proceed
• affirming that a magistrate judge correctly defined incarcerated peoples’ Eighth 27 Amendment right to medical treatment that is not deliberately indifferent to their serious 28 medical needs, like the way Judge Baldwin defined the right here
• rejecting an attempt to more 10 narrowly define a prisoner’s Eighth Amendment right to receive medical care
• “The issue of the City’s responsibility for the torts of its police officers is a difficult one that the district judge should not have attempted to resolve before the actual facts bearing on the issue were determined.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).