James C. Wright v. Ruth Rushen

Bad Law
642 F.2d 1129·1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 19307
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 13, 198180-4534California3,528 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sneed, J.

The issue is whether the district court properly issued a preliminary injunction mandating extensive changes at three California state prisons. Because we conclude that the district court did not apply the proper legal standards assessing the plaintiffs’ probability of ultimate success on the merits, the entire preliminary injunction must be set aside. We remand the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with our opinion.

BACKGROUND

The plaintiffs are a class of approximately 2,000 prisoners confined in administrative segregation in four California state prisons, Deuel Vocational Institution, Folsom Prison, San Quentin Prison, and Soledad Correctional Training Facility. Segregated housing within the California prisons is of various types, depending in part upon whether the inmate is considered a threat to others or a likely target for violence by his fellow inmates. The defendants are the wardens of the prisons and the California Director of Corrections. The plaintiffs sought relief on two claims. In Wright v. Enomoto, 462 F.Supp. 397 (N.D.Cal.1976), aff’d, 434 U.S. 1052 , 98 S.Ct. 1223 , 55 L.Ed.2d 756 (1978), a three-judge panel convened pursuant to 28…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.