Jones v. Connell, No. 87-5150

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore SEITZ, GREENBERG and ROSENN; GREENBERG
Citation833 F.2d 503
Docket NumberNo. 87-5150
Decision Date29 September 1987
PartiesMichael A. JONES v. Supervisor, Sergeant CONNELL, Supervisor, Lt. Pincheck, Sco. Colello, Sco. Kiesling, William H. Fauver, Commissioner, John J. Rafferty, Supt., J. Butler, Asst. Supt., L. Sherrer, Classification Comm. Member, Mr. Knief, Classification Committee Member, Lt. August, Classification Committee Member, Mr. Dickerson, Classification Committee Member, Appellants. . Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit Rule 12(6)

Page 503

833 F.2d 503
Michael A. JONES
v.
Supervisor, Sergeant CONNELL, Supervisor, Lt. Pincheck, Sco.
Colello, Sco. Kiesling, William H. Fauver, Commissioner,
John J. Rafferty, Supt., J. Butler, Asst. Supt., L. Sherrer,
Classification Comm. Member, Mr. Knief, Classification
Committee Member, Lt. August, Classification Committee
Member, Mr. Dickerson, Classification Committee Member, Appellants.
No. 87-5150.
United States Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit.
Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit
Rule 12(6) Sept. 29, 1987.
Decided Nov. 24, 1987.

W. Cary Edwards, Atty. Gen. of N.J., James J. Ciancia, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Modestino Carbone, Deputy Atty. Gen., Trenton, N.J., for appellants.

Michael A. Jones, pro se.

Before SEITZ, GREENBERG and ROSENN, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

GREENBERG, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiff, Michael A. Jones, a prisoner at Rahway State Prison in New Jersey, brought a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 on December 7, 1984 against certain correction officers charging that they were attempting to provoke him into committing an act that would result in plaintiff being charged with a disciplinary violation. Subsequently, there were several changes in plaintiff's prison classification status until on March 6, 1985 he was classified to gang minimum, inside only. In response to this new classification on March 19, 1985 plaintiff filed an amended complaint against the Commissioner of Corrections, the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent at Rahway and members of the classification committee charging that

Page 504

they caused plaintiff to be reclassified from full minimum to gang minimum, inside only, in retaliation for his original complaint.

Thereafter, plaintiff sought a preliminary injunction against being harassed and, in addition, asked for reinstatement to the full minimum status. On July 22, 1985, the district judge in a memorandum opinion and order directed that a hearing be held by a magistrate to determine whether plaintiff had in fact been subject to retaliation and, if so, what relief should be ordered. After holding the hearing, the magistrate on November 21, 1985 filed a report and recommendation in which he found that there had been no retaliation against plaintiff. Rather, there had been an error in the calculation of his parole eligibility date so that when it was correctly calculated under a "new" set of classification criteria, adopted in response to a prisoner's escape, he was ineligible for the full minimum status. The magistrate, however, was "troubled" by the fact that the new guidelines had not been reduced to writing. Thus, he recommended that the judge require the Department of Corrections to reduce them to writing and when that was done re-evaluate plaintiff's custody status pursuant to the written standard.

The matter was then considered by the judge who issued a memorandum opinion and order on August 21,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Rannels v. Hargrove, Civ. A. No. 89-6155.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • 20 Febrero 1990
    ...greatly upon the sovereignty protected by the Eleventh Amendment.2 Pennhurst II, 465 U.S. at 106, 104 S.Ct. at 911; Jones v. Connell, 833 F.2d 503, 505 (3d Cir.1987). To the extent that Rannels seeks damages for Hargrove's purported violation of Pennsylvania law, this court still lacks juri......
  • N.J. Primary Care Ass'n Inc. v. State, No. 12–3220.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 9 Julio 2013
    ...however, is “barred by the Eleventh Amendment from ordering ... state officials to conform their conduct to state law.” Jones v. Connell, 833 F.2d 503, 505 (3d Cir.1987); see also Concourse Rehabilitation & Nursing Ctr., Inc. v. DeBuono, 179 F.3d 38, 43 (2d Cir.1999) (“As we repeatedly have......
  • N.J. Primary Care Ass'n Inc. v. N.J. Dep't of Human Servs., No. 12-3220
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 9 Julio 2013
    ...is "barred by the Eleventh Amendment from ordering . . . state officials to conform their conduct to state law." Jones v. Connell, 833 F.2d 503, 505 (3d Cir. 1987); see also Concourse Rehabilitation & Nursing Ctr., Inc. v. DeBuono, 179 F.3d 38,Page 1643 (2d Cir. 1999) ("As we repeatedly hav......
  • New Jersey Educ. Ass'n v. New Jersey, Civ. No. 11-5024
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • 12 Diciembre 2011
    ...court [i]s barred by the Eleventh Amendment from ordering the state officials to conform their conduct to state law." Jones v. Connell, 833 F.2d 503, 505 (3d Cir. 1987) (citing Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984)); see also Kliesh v. Bucks County Domestic Rels......
4 cases
  • Rannels v. Hargrove, Civ. A. No. 89-6155.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • 20 Febrero 1990
    ...greatly upon the sovereignty protected by the Eleventh Amendment.2 Pennhurst II, 465 U.S. at 106, 104 S.Ct. at 911; Jones v. Connell, 833 F.2d 503, 505 (3d Cir.1987). To the extent that Rannels seeks damages for Hargrove's purported violation of Pennsylvania law, this court still lacks juri......
  • N.J. Primary Care Ass'n Inc. v. State, No. 12–3220.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 9 Julio 2013
    ...however, is “barred by the Eleventh Amendment from ordering ... state officials to conform their conduct to state law.” Jones v. Connell, 833 F.2d 503, 505 (3d Cir.1987); see also Concourse Rehabilitation & Nursing Ctr., Inc. v. DeBuono, 179 F.3d 38, 43 (2d Cir.1999) (“As we repeatedly have......
  • N.J. Primary Care Ass'n Inc. v. N.J. Dep't of Human Servs., No. 12-3220
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 9 Julio 2013
    ...is "barred by the Eleventh Amendment from ordering . . . state officials to conform their conduct to state law." Jones v. Connell, 833 F.2d 503, 505 (3d Cir. 1987); see also Concourse Rehabilitation & Nursing Ctr., Inc. v. DeBuono, 179 F.3d 38,Page 1643 (2d Cir. 1999) ("As we repeatedly hav......
  • New Jersey Educ. Ass'n v. New Jersey, Civ. No. 11-5024
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • 12 Diciembre 2011
    ...court [i]s barred by the Eleventh Amendment from ordering the state officials to conform their conduct to state law." Jones v. Connell, 833 F.2d 503, 505 (3d Cir. 1987) (citing Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984)); see also Kliesh v. Bucks County Domestic Rels......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT