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
Howard Frank Bailey, Sr., and Robert Martin Hood, Appellants, v. Joe Crain, Chief of Police, et al., Appellees
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. - 496 F.2d 23
Submitted April 15, 1974.Decided April 22, 1974
Louis Gilden, St. Louis, Mo., for appellants.
No appearance made nor brief filed for appellees.
Before HEANEY and STEPHENSON, Circuit Judges, and SMITH, Senior District Judge.
PER CURIAM.
The appellants filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1983 and 1985 in the United States, district Court for the Western District of Arkansas. The appellants alleged in specific and detailed language that while confined in the Hot Springs, Arkansas, jail awaiting trial on a robbery charge, the defendants denied them needed medical treatment for various ailments, subjected them to cruel and unusual punishment by placing them in an unhealthy maximum security cell without cause, denied them access to the courts, and 'continuously' harassed them.
The District Court ordered the complaint filed and dismissed it for failure to state a claim and as frivolous and malicious. A prisoner's petition should not be dismissed unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972); Jones v. Lockhart, 484 F.2d 1192 (8th Cir. 1973).
Applying this standard to the appellants' claims, we conclude that it was error for the District Court to dismiss their petition for failure to state a claim. In addition, we find no support in the record for the District Court's conclusion that the petition was frivolous and malicious. We remand to the District Court with directions to it to permit the complaint to be filed and served on the defendants.
---------------