Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

459 F.2d 1041

Docket No. 71-1443.

Mertz v. Pinto

Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted March 10, 1972.

Decided May 1, 1972.

Third Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1972-05-01

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 1974

3 federal appellate · 1 district ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Gittlemacker v. Prasse · Negrich v. Hohn · Kent v. Prasse

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1972-05-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1John Louis Mertz, in pro. per.

¶2George F. Kugler, Jr., Joseph T. Maloney, Trenton, N. J., for appellees.

¶3Before McLAUGHLIN, VAN DUSEN and ALDISERT, Circuit Judges.

¶4OPINION OF THE COURT

¶5PER CURIAM:

¶6Plaintiff, a New Jersey prisoner, appeals from a district court order granting the motion to dismiss, filed by defendant officials of the Rahway, New Jersey, State Prison, his civil rights action.1 After careful consideration of the record and the briefs of counsel, we have concluded that the district court should be affirmed for the reasons stated in the opinion of Judge Whipple.

¶7There can be no recovery under the Civil Rights Act for injuries resulting from plaintiff’s September 1967 fall.2 See Gittlemacker v. Prasse, 428 F.2d 1, 6 (3d Cir. 1970); Kent v. Prasse, 265 F. Supp. 673, 675 (W.D.Pa.1967), aff’d, 385 F.2d 406, 407 (3d Cir. 1967). Also, the record, including the complaint,3 does not support the contention of plaintiff that he has been “arbitrarily and capriciously” denied the equal opportunity to earn full-minimum time credits off his sentence due to his assignment as a porter. See Harris v. Yeager, 291 F.Supp. 1015, 1017-1018 (D.N.J.1968), aff’d, 410 F.2d 1376 (3d Cir. 1969).4

¶8Affirmed.

/459/f2d/1041 · .json · Public domain