Kasib Tauheed Bilal v. O. Davis G. Hitz J. Williams, Lt. H. Glass

Eighth Circuit

Kasib Tauheed Bilal v. O. Davis G. Hitz J. Williams, Lt. H. Glass

918 F.2d 723, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 19322, 1990 WL 166245

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedNovember 2, 1990

Docket89-2774

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 918 F.2d 723 (Kasib Tauheed Bilal v. O. Davis G. Hitz J. Williams, Lt. H. Glass) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kasib Tauheed Bilal v. O. Davis G. Hitz J. Williams, Lt. H. Glass, 918 F.2d 723, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 19322, 1990 WL 166245 (8th Cir. 1990).

Pincite

Opinions

WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge.

Kasib Tauheed Bilal appeals pro se the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the defendant Arkansas prison officials in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court held that Bilal did not have a first amendment right to be addressed only by his Muslim name and that defendants did not violate Bilal’s due process rights by expelling him from disciplinary hearings after he refused to respond to his committed name.

Bilal failed to controvert Davis’s attestation that he was not a member of the disciplinary committee at any time pertinent to Bilal’s claims. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e). Thus, we affirm the grant of summary judgment for defendant Davis.

We reverse the decision of the district court as to Bilal’s first and fourteenth amendment claims against the remaining defendants, and we remand the case for further consideration in light of Salaam v. Lockhart, 905 F.2d 1168 (8th Cir.1990).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge.

Kasib Tauheed Bilal appeals pro se the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the defendant Arkansas prison officials in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court held that Bilal did not have a first amendment right to be addressed only by his Muslim name and that defendants did not violate Bilal’s due process rights by expelling him from disciplinary hearings after he refused to respond to his committed name.

Bilal failed to controvert Davis’s attestation that he was not a member of the disciplinary committee at any time pertinent to Bilal’s claims. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e). Thus, we affirm the grant of summary judgment for defendant Davis.

We reverse the decision of the district court as to Bilal’s first and fourteenth amendment claims against the remaining defendants, and we remand the case for further consideration in light of Salaam v. Lockhart, 905 F.2d 1168 (8th Cir.1990).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

918 F.2d 723, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 19322, 1990 WL 166245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kasib-tauheed-bilal-v-o-davis-g-hitz-j-williams-lt-h-glass-ca8-1990.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack