Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Clarence Tate, Jr. v. Olin G. Blackwell, Warden

475 F.2d 193

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1973-05-29
Topic
general

PER CURIAM: Clarence Tate, Jr., an inmate of the United States Penitentiary in Atlanta, Georgia, initiated the present action under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 et seq., against his warden and others for damages resulting from personal injuries allegedly incurred while engaged in assigned duties at the prison. Tate contended that Warden Blackwell and other prison officials conspired to make him fall off a ladder in order to deprive him of his constitutional rights. The district court granted defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. We affirm. It is evident from the complaint the plaintiff relies solely upon the negligence of the prison authorities and there *194 is no connection between the defendants’ alleged negligence and the deprivation of any of the plaintiff’s constitutional rights.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Clarence Tate, Jr. v. Olin G. Blackwell, Warden. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status
pending
Cited by
2 opinions
TATE v. BLACKWELL,475 F.2d 193(5th Cir. 1973)
CLARENCE TATE, JR., PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. OLIN G. BLACKWELL, WARDEN, ET
AL., RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES.
No. 71-1577.
Summary Calendar.fn*
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 15, 1973.
Certiorari Denied May 29, 1973.
Clarence Tate, Jr., pro se.

John W. Stokes, Jr., U.S. Atty., Beverly B. Bates, Asst. U.S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for respondents-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
Before WISDOM, AINSWORTH and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
[1] Clarence Tate, Jr., an inmate of the United States Penitentiary in Atlanta, Georgia, initiated the present action under the Civil Rights Act,42 U.S.C. § 1983et seq., against his warden and others for damages resulting from personal injuries allegedly incurred while engaged in assigned duties at the prison. Tate contended that Warden Blackwell and other prison officials conspired to make him fall off a ladder in order to deprive him of his constitutional rights. The district court granted defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings. We affirm.

[2] It is evident from the complaint the plaintiff relies solely upon the negligence of the prison authorities and therePage 194is no connection between the defendants' alleged negligence and the deprivation of any of the plaintiff's constitutional rights. Our decision is without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to pursue a possible remedy under18 U.S.C. § 4126, which provides compensation for federal prisoners injured in the performance of assigned work duties at a federal penitentiary.

[3] Affirmed.Page 232
  1. Rule 18, 5 Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Company of New York et al., 5 Cir. 1970,431 F.2d 409, Part I. ↩