Difference between revisions of "Nasir v. Morgan"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(building library) |
FernoKlump (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | In ''Nasir v. Morgan'', 350 F.3d 366 (3d Cir. 2003), the Court of Appeals for the [[Third Circuit]] upheld a ban on correspondence by inmates with former inmates. The Court rejected a [[First Amendment]] challenge to that rule, noting that the ban was justified by security issues. | + | In '''''Nasir v. Morgan''''', 350 F.3d 366 (3d Cir. 2003), the Court of Appeals for the [[Third Circuit]] upheld a ban on correspondence by inmates with former inmates. The Court rejected a [[First Amendment]] challenge to that rule, noting that the ban was justified by security issues. |
This decision is often cited for its statement that an appellate court will uphold a district court's grant of a summary judgment motion on any basis so long as that basis was previously presented to the district court. ''Id.'' at 368. | This decision is often cited for its statement that an appellate court will uphold a district court's grant of a summary judgment motion on any basis so long as that basis was previously presented to the district court. ''Id.'' at 368. | ||
Revision as of 23:24, April 30, 2008
In Nasir v. Morgan, 350 F.3d 366 (3d Cir. 2003), the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a ban on correspondence by inmates with former inmates. The Court rejected a First Amendment challenge to that rule, noting that the ban was justified by security issues.
This decision is often cited for its statement that an appellate court will uphold a district court's grant of a summary judgment motion on any basis so long as that basis was previously presented to the district court. Id. at 368.