Hill v. Gentry
| Decision Date | 21 June 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 16531.,16531. |
| Citation | 280 F.2d 88 |
| Parties | James Francis HILL, Appellant, v. Correctional Officer GENTRY, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
James Francis Hill, Springfield, Mo., has no attorney.
Edward L. Scheufler, U. S. Atty., Kansas City, Mo., for appellee.
Before JOHNSEN, Chief Judge, and MATTHES, Circuit Judge.
Appellant is an inmate of the Medical Center for Federal Prisoners at Springfield, Missouri, under a federal criminal sentence. He sought to institute an action on diversity jurisdiction against a "correctional officer" of the Medical Center, to recover damages under Missouri law for an assault and battery alleged to have been committed upon him by the officer in the latter's individual and not official capacity.
The District Court denied appellant leave to file the suit in forma pauperis, for the reason, as set forth in the court's opinion, reported in 182 F.Supp. 500, 502, that "under the law of the State of Missouri it appears to be against the public policy of that State for a convict serving a sentence for less than his life to sue in the courts of that state on a claim accruing to him while he is a convict; but he can bring an action on such a claim after he is released from confinement under a criminal sentence, and he has the full period of limitation as provided by other statutes of Missouri so to do, after his disability has been removed". (Cases cited.)
The Missouri civil death statute, V.A. M.S. § 222.010, as presently existing, provides: "A sentence to imprisonment in an institution within the state department of corrections for a term less than life suspends all civil rights of the persons so sentenced during the term thereof * * *". The phrase "an institution within the state department of corrections" was substituted for the term "the penitentiary", previously contained in the statute, by an amendment made by the General Assembly of Missouri in 1959. S.B. No. 87 of 1959, § 1.
But even before this amendment, the Missouri Supreme Court had held that federal sentences were not within the purview or application of the State's civil death statute. As early as 1863, the Court declared: ....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Winston v. United States
...traditionally been able to sue their jailers as individuals for injuries caused by the jailer's negligence. See, e. g., Hill v. Gentry, 280 F.2d 88 (8th Cir. 1958), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 875, 81 S.Ct. 119, 5 L.Ed.2d 96 (1960).1 The doctrine of sovereign immunity, however, has insulated the......
-
Queen v. South Carolina Department of Corrections
...Claims Act. Winston v. United States (2nd Cir., 1962) 305 F.2d 253, 270, aff. 374 U.S. 150, 83 S.Ct. 1850, 10 L.Ed.2d 805; Hill v. Gentry (8th Cir., 1960) 280 F.2d 88, cert. den. 364 U.S. 875, 81 S.Ct. 119, 5 L.Ed.2d 96. See, Beyond the Ken of the Courts: A Critique of Judicial Refusal to R......
-
White v. Fawcett Publications
...for less than life has been held inapplicable to prisoners under federal sentences in the United States Medical Center. Hill v. Gentry (C.A.8) 280 F.2d 88. Thus, the statute cannot be applied in the case at For the foregoing reasons, it appears that this cause should be dismissed without pr......
-
Cohen v. United States
...States Marshal owed a duty of "safe-keeping and protection from unlawful injury" to a prisoner who was killed by a mob. See also Hill v. Gentry, 280 F.2d 88, cert. den. 364 U.S. 875, 81 S.Ct. 119, 5 L.Ed.2d 96. As the Federal Tort Claims Act2 results in liability "if a private person, would......