A prisoner brought a pro se action against prison officials, alleging, inter alia, that they have exposed him to unreasonable levels of ETS in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The District Court (Richey, J.) judge dismissed the ETS claim, ruling that Pryor-El failed “to satisfy the objective prong of a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim.” He did not “present any scientific or statistical evidence establishing a likelihood that a injury to his health will be caused by the exposure nor does he allege that the risk of harm is so grave that it ‘violates contemporary standards of decency to expose anyone to such a risk’ or assert any factual allegations from which the Court could draw such a conclusion.” Furthermore, the court ruled that the “Plaintiff does not allege any constant exposure to ETS and none of the allegation in the Complaint concern his cell.”
892 F. Supp. 261, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8994 (U.S.D.C. D.C. 1995).