On April 30, 1999, a prisoner filed an action pro se, alleging that the defendants violated his Eighth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment when they exposed him to secondhand smoke. On July 8, 1999, Davis moved for a preliminary injunction enjoining the defendants from retaliating against him for commencing the lawsuit. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion, ruling that he “fails to show that he will suffer irreparable harm if the court fails to grant a preliminary injunction.”
Davis later moved for leave to file an amended complaint and add defendants to the case. A U.S. Magistrate Judge denied his motion and ruled, at 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20703, that the allegations underlying the plaintiff’s proposed claims did not establish violations of a constitutional right. The U. S. District Court later granted summary judgment for the defendants and dismissed his complaint. Davis appealed.
On December 13, 2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, at 316 F. 3d 93, 17.8 TPLR 2.267, 2002 U.S.App. LEXIS 25730 (U.S.C.A. 2nd Cir. 2002), affirmed the district court’s denial of preliminary injunctive relief and amendment of the complaint and affirmed summary judgment as to several of the defendants who are immune from suit. However, the Court of Appeals vacated the district court’s judgment as to the remaining defendants and remanded the case for further proceedings.
On July 31, 2006, the U.S. District Court ruled, at 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52420, that Davis “has demonstrated a material question of fact as to the subjective component of his Eighth Amendment” claim; therefore, the court denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20696 (U.S.D.C. W.D.N.Y. 1999).