Zatko v. Rowland

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that continuous light depriving a prisoner of sleep would be unconstitutional but dismissing the claim because the officers did not use the light to try to keep the prisoner awake
• noting that continuous light depriving a prisoner of sleep would be unconstitutional but dismissing the claim because the officers did not use the light to try to keep the prisoner awake
• noting that continuous light depriving a prisoner of sleep would be unconstitutional but holding there was no constitutional violation because the officers did not use the light to keep the prisoner awake
• noting that continuous light depriving a prisoner of sleep would be unconstitutional but holding there was no constitutional violation because the officers did not use the light to keep the prisoner awake
• noting that continuous light depriving a prisoner of sleep would be unconstitutional but holding there was no constitutional violation because the officers did not use the light to keep the prisoner awake
• where 13 prisoner refused treatment, deliberate indifference claim could not be sustained

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).