Simon v. Federal Prison
This text of Simon v. Federal Prison (Simon v. Federal Prison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter Citation Limited Pursuant to lst Cir. Loc. R. 32.3
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit
No. 03-2114
CHARLES SIMON,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
FEDERAL PRISON INDUSTRIES, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Joseph L. Tauro, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Lynch, Lipez and Howard, Circuit Judges.
Charles Simon on brief pro se.
March 31, 2004 Per Curiam. We affirm the order of dismissal substantially
for the reasons recited in the district court's thorough decision.
We add simply that any Eighth Amendment Bivens claim against
defendant Robinson in her personal capacity would fail on
qualified-immunity grounds, inasmuch as no constitutional right to
post-release medical treatment in these circumstances has been
clearly established. See generally DeShaney v. Winnebago County
Dep't of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189, 200 (1989) (The affirmative
duty to protect [an inmate] arises ... from the limitation which
[the government] has imposed on his freedom to act on his own
behalf.") (citing Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 103 (1976)). Nor
do we find anything in Granade v. United States, 356 F.2d 837 (2d
Cir. 1966), that would call the validity of 28 C.F.R. § 301.317
into question.
The motions for oral argument and for expedited review are
denied.
Affirmed.
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Simon v. Federal Prison, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simon-v-federal-prison-ca1-2004.