Terrence Prude alleged that staff of the Milwaukee County Jail
had subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment because they fed
him nothing but nutriloaf, which Judge Posner of the 7th Circuit
described as 'a bad-tasting food given to prisoners as a form
of punishment', for periods of seven to ten days at a time.
Prude alleged that this steady diet caused vomiting, stomach pains,
constipation, 'alarming' weight loss and possibly an anal
fissure ('which is no fun at all', in the words of the
Summary judgment was initially granted in favour of the
defendants, but Judge Posner thought this was wrong: their response
to the suit was 'contumacious' in that they ignored the
self-represented Prude's discovery demands and the court's
order to comply with them. The defendants' evidence on summary
judgment was a 'preposterous' hearsay assertion that
nutriloaf 'has been determined to be a nutritious substance for
regular meals'. The fact that Prude had sued prison staff who
had not actually been indifferent to his health was not fatal to
his appeal; at least some of them were aware of the dire effects of
nutriloaf and did nothing to help. The court below was correct,
however, to strike Prude's claim that it was cruel to offer him
a sandwich ('and not of nutriloaf, either') as a bribe to
spy on other prisoners; Prude had rejected the offer, but not
getting the sandwich made him no worse off than he would have been
otherwise. The defendants were ordered to show cause why they
should not be sanctioned for their flouting of the lower
court's orders; if they ignored this order, 'they will find
themselves in deep trouble'.
It's not often that our little blog intersects with such titanic struggles as the U.S. presidential race – and by using the term "titanic" I certainly don't mean to suggest that anything disastrous is in the future.
J.J. v. C.C., is an interesting case in which the court held that an automotive garage owes a duty to minor children to secure the vehicles on the premises by locking the cars and safely storing the car keys...
In Irwin v. Alberta Veterinary Medical Association, 2015 ABCA 396, the Alberta Court of Appeal found that the "ABVMA" failed to afford procedural fairness to a veterinarian undergoing an incapacity assessment.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).