We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Richardson v. McKnight: What Does the Future of Qualified Immunity Hold for Nongovernmental Employees?
- Authors
Koenig, Heidi; Oyez, Oyez
- Abstract
This article examines the U.S. Supreme Court case Richardson v. McKnight in 1997, the case that assesses the legal defenses to suit available to the guards of a privately run prison that contracted with the state of Tennessee to provide prison services. McKnight is a prisoner in Tennessee's South Central Correctional Center, a facility run by Corrections Corp. of America. McKnight brought federal constitutional tort action against two guards, Darryl Richardson and John Walker, claiming that the guards had placed him in extremely tight physical restraints, that deprived him of a constitutionally protected right. The prison guards sought to have the case against them dismissed, claiming that they were protected by qualified immunity because of their position. The district court denied the existence of qualified immunity due to the fact that the guards were employed by a private company rather than the state.
- Subjects
RICHARDSON v. McKnight (Supreme Court case); TRIALS (Law); ACTIONS &; defenses (Administrative law); PRIVILEGES &; immunities (Law); PRISON personnel
- Publication
Public Administration Review, 1998, Vol 58, Issue 1, p8
- ISSN
0033-3352
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.2307/976883