Citation network
West Vs. Atkins
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 20, 1988
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 42 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court West v. AtkinsSearch
-
U.S. 42 (1988) West v. AtkinsSearch
-
for violation of his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, relying on Estelle v. GambleSearch
-
Lugar v. EdmondsonSearch
-
capacity or exercising his official responsibilities, he abuses the position given to him by the State. Polk County v. DodsonSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Spicer v. WilliamsonSearch
-
medical needs, by failing to provide adequate treatment. Relying on a decision of its controlling court in Calvert v. SharpSearch
-
a serious medical need, a showing necessary for West ultimately to prevail on his Eighth Amendment claim. See Estelle v. GambleSearch
-
between Doctor Atkins and the physician-employees assumed to be state actors in Estelle and in O'Connor v. DonaldsonSearch
-
control over the circumstances and sources of a prisoner's medical treatment. Id. at 998-999, citing Blum v. YaretskySearch
-
the prison medical system qualifies his actions as under color of state law. 815 F.2d at 999, citing United States v. PriceSearch
-
and Tower v. GloverSearch
-
The Fourth Circuit's ruling conflicts with decisions of the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, Ancata v. PrisonSearch
-
Health Services, Inc., 769 F.2d 700 (1985), and Ort v. PinchbackSearch
-
States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law. Parratt v. TaylorSearch
-
U. S. 527 , 451 U. S. 535 (1981) (overruled in part on other grounds, Daniels v. WilliamsSearch
-
to fulfill the first requirement by alleging a violation of his rights secured by the Eighth Amendment under Estelle v. GambleSearch
-
U. S. 299 , 313 U. S. 326 (1941). Accord, Monroe v. PapeSearch
-
overruled in part on other grounds, Monell v. NewSearch
-
id. at 454 U. S. 329 (dissenting opinion). In Lugar v. EdmondsonSearch
-
Id. at 457 U. S. 935 . Accord, Rendell-Baker v. KohnSearch
-
suit acts under color of state law when he abuses the position given to him by the State. See Monroe v. PapeSearch
-
acting in his official capacity or while exercising his responsibilities pursuant to state law. See, e.g., Parratt v. TaylorSearch
-
H. Kress & Co., 398 U. S. 144 , 398 U. S. 152 (1970). See also Flagg Bros., Inc. v. BrooksSearch
-
U.S. at 436 U. S. 157 , n. 5. Indeed, Polk County v. DodsonSearch
-
Id. at 454 U. S. 323 , n. 13. See also Lugar v. EdmondsonSearch
-
and since Polk County, in which this Court either has identified professionals as state actors, see, e.g., Tower v. GloverSearch
-
suits, see, e.g., Estelle v. GambleSearch
-
U. S. 97 (1976) (medical director of state prison who was also the treating physician). See also Youngberg v. RomeoSearch
-
provide adequate medical care to those whom it has incarcerated. Id. at 429 U. S. 104 . See also Spicer v. WilliamsonSearch
-
Id. at 996, n. 2, citing Blum v. YaretskySearch
-
concluded that prison physicians act under color of state law when treating incarcerated persons. See, e.g., Miranda v. MunozSearch
-
Norris v. FrameSearch
-
Murrell v. BennettSearch
-
Byrd v. WilsonSearch
-
Duncan v. DuckworthSearch
-
Kelsey v. EwingSearch
-
in light of settled doctrine that we avoid constitutional questions whenever possible. See Spector Motor Service, Inc. v. McLaughlinSearch
-
funding and were subject to state regulation did not, without more, convert their conduct into state action. See Blum v. YaretskySearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court West v. AtkinsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial