holding that the mere fact that a supervisor kept track of plaintiff's arrival times does not constitute adverse employment action
Summary of this case from Hall v. United Parcel Service95-6465.
February 5, 1997.
Appeal from W.D.Oki., 867 F.Supp. 989
Decisions without Published Opinions Affirmed.
holding that the mere fact that a supervisor kept track of plaintiff's arrival times does not constitute adverse employment action
Summary of this case from Hall v. United Parcel Servicefinding no violation stemming from twenty-three-hour lockdown with meals in cells, limited vocational, educational, and recreational services, and exercise of one hour per day in cell
Summary of this case from Cheney v. Deanaffirming summary judgment as to conditions-of-confinement claim where plaintiff failed to plead culpable state of mind, and record indicated that prison officials sought to remedy condition complained of
Summary of this case from Cary v. HickenlooperIn Tolbert, the ALJ found a claimant's testimony regarding pain not credible. The Tenth Circuit reversed, noting that the ALJ's "findings made no reference to [the consulting physician's] diagnosis of somatoform pain disorder."
Summary of this case from Joseph v. Colvinexplaining that personal injury actions arising from incidents on federal enclaves may support federal jurisdiction, and that, under 16 U.S.C. § 457, now 28 U.S.C. § 5001, personal injuries sustained within a federal enclave are governed by the state law of the state within which the federal enclave is situated
Summary of this case from Ramos v. C. Ortiz Corp.noting that a prisoner's assignment to administrative segregation at CSP did not provide him with a procedural due process claim
Summary of this case from Escobar v. Reidrequiring inmates to eat meals in cells that they must clean themselves with a minimal amount of cleaning supplies does not present an excessive risk to inmate health or safety
Summary of this case from Holder v. Hebertpreventing inmate from attending service for six weeks did not substantially burden religious practice under RFRA
Summary of this case from Ulmann v. Andersonnoting that the plaintiff should have been aware that she could have asserted her rights earlier because the earlier alleged incidents were more serious in nature than the later incidents
Summary of this case from Harris v. Smithkline Beechamnoting that the plaintiff should have been aware that she could have asserted her rights earlier because the earlier alleged incidents were more serious in nature than the later incidents
Summary of this case from LaRose v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc.Full title:Schooley v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith, Inc
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Date published: Feb 5, 1997
See Coleman, 501 U.S. at 750, 111 S.Ct. at 2565. As recently stated in Starr v. Wyoming Dept. of Corrections…
Ramos v. C. Ortiz Corp.Mater, 200 F.2d at 125. Finally, Plaintiff maintains that OMI Holdings, Inc. v. Howell, 864 F. Supp. 1046 (D.…