Case Citator › Gregory A. Ivey v. George Wilson, Ron Hanley, Lt. Barnes, Robert Hendricks, Dewey Sowders, Capt. Barnett, Phil Parker, Andy Knight, and Tom Stewart

Gregory A. Ivey v. George Wilson, Ron Hanley, Lt. Barnes, Robert Hendricks, Dewey Sowders, Capt. Barnett, Phil Parker, Andy Knight, and Tom Stewart

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Sixth Circuit
Citation
832 F.2d 950
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
28 of 28
Citing cases (total)
28
Treatment dates
1995
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. Ivey v. Wilson's prison segregation due process analysis was displaced by the Supreme Court's later requirement that the restraint impose an atypical and significant hardship. Its distinct Eighth Amendment rulings on verbal abuse and ordinary prison discomfort continue to be applied.
More on how this was screened

All 28 flagged citations have been read; the one confirmed change is listed below. The Sixth Circuit's later Carney v. Craven opinion applies the new hardship test while continuing to cite Ivey for its verbal abuse rule.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

28 later cases cite Gregory A. Ivey v. George Wilson, Ron Hanley, Lt. Barnes, Robert Hendricks, Dewey Sowders, Capt. Barnett, Phil Parker, Andy Knight, and Tom Stewart; 28 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Gregory A. Ivey v. George Wilson, Ron Hanley, Lt. Barnes, Robert Hendricks, Dewey Sowders, Capt. Barnett, Phil Parker, Andy Knight, and Tom Stewart?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • The Supreme Court displaced the mandatory language test Ivey used to find a state-created liberty interest in avoiding prison segregation, requiring an atypical and significant hardship instead.

    Sandin v. Conner · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    In light of the above discussion, we believe that the search for a negative implication from mandatory language in prisoner regulations has strayed from the real concerns under-girding the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause. ... But these interests will be generally limited to freedom from restraint which ... nonetheless imposes atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Gregory A. Ivey v. George Wilson, Ron Hanley, Lt. Barnes, Robert Hendricks, Dewey Sowders, Capt. Barnett, Phil Parker, Andy Knight, and Tom Stewart and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace