Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Smith v. Elo

61 F. Supp. 2d 668 (E.D. Mich. 1999)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Smith v. Elo

1 Citing case

  1. Radler v. Turco

    466 F. Supp. 3d 287 (D. Mass. 2020)

    Because Plaintiff admits that he did not enter the custody of the Massachusetts Department of Corrections (the "Massachusetts DOC") until January 21, 2015 (Docket No. 36 at 1), Defendants cannot be liable for failing to inform Plaintiff about the New Hampshire detainer from July 3, 2013, through January 21, 2015. Cf.Smith v. Elo , 61 F. Supp. 2d 668, 673 (E. D. Mich. 1999), aff'd , 23 F. App'x 310 (6th Cir. 2001). But the construing the complaint favorably to account for Plaintiff's pro se status, the Court infers that Defendants became aware of the detainer and that IAD protections attached at the time of his transfer to the Massachusetts DOC.