Case Resources
Search this Case
in
Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web
Search
MSN
Web Search
Yahoo!
Web Search
in the News
Google News
Search
Google
News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog
Search
Technorati
Blog Search
in other Databases
Google
Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Frankie v. Joseph, Petitioner-appellant, v. Louisiana State Penitentiary et al., Respondents-appellees
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. - 482 F.2d 277
July 24, 1973
Frankie V. Joseph, pro se.
William Guste, Atty. Gen., S. J. Dileo, Jr., Sp. Counsel, Criminal Div., Baton Rouge, La., for respondents-appellees.
Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, and DYER and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Frankie V. Joseph, a prisoner of the State of Louisiana, filed a Civil Rights1 complaint seeking monetary damages from the director of state correctional institutions and several prison officials, for alleged mistreatment because he is an "Islam Muslim." The district court granted leave to file the complaint in forma pauperis, and subsequently dismissed it on motion of the defendants. Leave to appeal in forma pauperis was denied by the district court but granted by this Court.
It appears that the complaint stated a claim for damages at least for wrongfully placing and keeping Joseph in solitary confinement and for abusing him while there. See Sostre v. McGinnis, 2 Cir. 1971, 442 F.2d 178. "[I]t must be remembered that prisoner petitions, no less than any other complaint filed in Federal Court, may not be dismissed on the pleadings 'unless it appears to a certainty that the plaintiff would not be entitled to recover under any state of facts which could be proved in support of his claim."' Campbell v. Beto, 5 Cir. 1972, 460 F.2d 765.
Vacated and remanded.
42 U.S.C. Sec. 1981 et seq