TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Victor H. Gurczynski v. Howard H. Yeager, Principal Keeper, New Jersey State Prison, and George Goodman, Superintendent, Leesburg State Prison Farm

Victor H. GURCZYNSKI, Appellant, v. Howard H. YEAGER, Principal Keeper, New Jersey State Prison, and George Goodman, Superintendent, Leesburg State Prison Farm

Gurczynski v. Yeager, 339 F.2d 884 (3d Cir. 1964)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
December 18, 1964
Docket
No. 14987_1
Judges
McLaughlin, Staley, Hastie
Citations
339 F.2d 8841964 U.S. App. LEXIS 3531

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the dismissal of the complaint in this cause by the district court. The complaint alleges violation of appellant’s civil rights by the prison authorities of the State of New Jersey. Specifically appellant states that he was not given psychiatric treatment as had been suggested by the sentencing state judge. He also says that his request to be transferred from a New Jersey state prison farm to the state prison at Trenton was not granted. Finally, he complains that after he became intoxicated and escaped from the prison farm, he was punished by being placed in solitary confinement on a restricted diet in the state prison itself. The district judge allowed the complaint to be filed without prepayment of costs. After examining it, the court dismissed it as being without merit. We are convinced that such course was proper.

The face of the complaint does not present any involvement of appellant’s federal rights. What is alleged concerns New Jersey state prison operation and discipline. Discipline reasona- *885 íbly maintained in those prisons is not under the supervisory direction of the federal courts. Kelly v. Dowd, 140 F.2d 81 (7 Cir. 1944). There is nothing in the circumstances related to indicate any reasonable basis for interference with the state authority, even though appellant’s -claim is under the guise of violation of his constitutional rights. United States ex rel. Morris v. Radio Station WENR, 209 F.2d 105 (7 Cir. 1953). See also Curtis v. Jacques, 130 F.Supp. 920 (D.C. W.D.Mich.N.D.1954); Grove v. Smyth, 169 F.Supp. 852 (D.C.E.D.Va.1958); Hatfield v. Bailleaux, 290 F.2d 632 (9 Cir. 1961).

The judgment of the district court will ibe affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 26 cases

View all citing references →
1965: 61966: 11967: 11968: 21969: 41970: 21971: 51972: 31973: 11974: 119652026peak 1965 · 6

Most recent

  1. Watkins v. Johnson375 F. Supp. 1005 (E.D. Pa. 1974)
  2. United States of America ex rel. David Tyrrell v. Fred Speaker, Former Atty. General of Pa.471 F.2d 1197 (3d Cir. 1973)
  3. Buszka v. Johnson351 F. Supp. 771 (E.D. Pa. 1972)
  4. Marnin v. Pinto463 F.2d 583 (3d Cir. 1972)
  5. Braxton v. Carlson340 F. Supp. 999 (M.D. Penn. 1972)
  6. Mayberry v. Maroney337 F. Supp. 601 (W.D. Pa. 1971)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

DepthCaseCited by
Hatfield v. Bailleaux, 290 F.2d 632 (9th Cir. 1961) 113
United States ex rel. Morris v. Radio Station Wenr, 209 F.2d 105 (7th Cir. 1953) 60
Kelly v. Dowd, 140 F.2d 81 (7th Cir. 1944) 50
Curtis v. Jacques, 130 F. Supp. 920 (W.D. Mich. 1954) 6
Grove v. Smyth, 169 F. Supp. 852 (E.D. Va. 1958) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list