Griffin v. Doe

10 Citing cases

  1. Evans v. Franklin Cnty. Corr. II

    2:22-cv-3669 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 22, 2022)   Cited 2 times

    (prisoners have no constitutionally guaranteed right to purchase commissary items at the same or lower price than charged at regular retail stores). Griffin v. Doe, No. 1:10-cv-1987, 2011 WL 94563, at *1 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 11, 2011). See also Ramsey v. Knox Cnty. Sheriff's Off. Jail & Facilities, No. 3:20-cv-486, 2020 WL 6730990, at *3 (E.D. Tenn. Nov. 16, 2020) (holding same).

  2. Culberson v. Franklin Cnty. Corr.

    2:22-cv-3671 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 13, 2022)   Cited 8 times

    Griffin v. Doe, No. 1:10-cv-1987, 2011 WL 94563, at *1 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 11, 2011). See also Ramsey v. Knox Cnty. Sheriff's Off. Jail & Facilities, No. 3:20-cv-486, 2020 WL 6730990, at *3 (E.D. Tenn. Nov. 16, 2020) (holding same).

  3. Griffin v. Bradley

    Civil Action 1:22-cv-103 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 28, 2022)

    28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Here, Plaintiff has at least three such dismissals, namely, the following cases were dismissed pursuant to § 1915: Griffin v. Miner, 1:06-cv-1889 (N.D. Ohio); Griffin v. Collins, 2:09-cv-210 (S.D. Ohio); Griffin v. Doe, 1:10-cv-1987 (N.D. Ohio). In view of Plaintiff's multiple “strikes, ” he is deemed a “three striker” under § 1915(g) such that he may not proceed in forma pauperis unless he falls within the statutory exception set forth in § 1915(g), which applies to prisoners who are “under imminent danger of serious physical injury.”

  4. Goldman v. Michigan

    Case Number: 2:18-cv-11666 (E.D. Mich. Jul. 17, 2018)   Cited 3 times

    The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted because courts have consistently held that prisoners have no constitutional right to purchase products at a particular price or at a price comparable to that offered at a non-prison store. See e.g. Griffin v. Doe, No. 1:10CV1987, 2011 WL 94563, at *1 (N.D. Ohio Jan.11, 2011); Simpson v. Caruso, No. 1:09-cv-245, 2009 WL 1010973, at * 3 (W.D. Mich. April. 14, 2009); Floyd v. Emmet County Correctional Facility, No. 1:06-CV-283, 2006 WL 1429536, at * 4 (W.D. Mich. May 23, 2006) (prisoners have no constitutionally guaranteed right to purchase commissary items at the same or lower price than charged at regular retail stores); McCall v. Keefe Supply Co., 71 Fed. App'x 779, 780 (10th Cir.2003) (allegation that prisoner was overcharged for goods at prison commissary failed to state a constitutional claim).

  5. Brown v. Kasich

    CASE NO. 4:16CV2284 (N.D. Ohio Feb. 28, 2017)   Cited 4 times

    Plaintiff claims that items carried in the jail commissary are over-priced. Plaintiff has no federal constitutional right to purchase items from a commissary, and therefore has no constitutional right to purchase products at the same price as they are sold in retail stores. SeeTokar v. Armontrout, 97 F.3d 1078, 1083 (8th Cir. 1996); Hopkins v. Keefe CommissaryNetworks Sales, No. 07-745, 2007 WL 2080480, at *5 (W.D. Pa. 2007); Griffin v. Doe, No. 1:10CV1987, 2011 WL 94563, at *1 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 11, 2011) ("Prisoners have no constitutional right to purchase products at the same price as charged in retail stores."). v. Educational Programs

  6. Adams v. Hardin Cnty. Det. Ctr.

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-P29-CRS (W.D. Ky. May. 12, 2016)   Cited 1 times

    . Dist. LEXIS 5483, at *22 (D. Conn. Mar. 30, 2004) ("The plaintiff has no constitutional right to purchase items from the commissary or outside vendors,"); Bagwell v. Brewington-Carr, No. 97-714-GMS, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21413, at *11 (D. Del. Aug. 25, 2000) ( "Incarcerated [plaintiff] does not have a constitutional right to purchase potato chips and soda pop.") In addition, because Plaintiffs do not have a federal constitutional right to purchase commissary items, they have no right to purchase commissary items at a particular price or to have Defendants restrained from charging exorbitant prices. McCall v. Keefe Supply Co., 71 F. App'x 779, 780 (10th Cir. 2003) (stating that an inmate's claim that prison commissary charged "outrageous" prices for goods purchased through the prison commissary failed to state a constitutional claim); French v. Butterworth, 614 F.2d 23, 25 (1st Cir. 1980) (no legal basis exists for a demand that inmates be offered items for purchase at or near cost); Griffin v. Doe, No. 1:10CV1987, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2618, at *3 (N.D. Ohio Jan.1 1, 2011) (prisoners have no constitutional right to purchase products at the same price as charged in retail stores). With regard to the allegations that HCDC charges for medical care, a violation of the Eighth Amendment only occurs if the prison or jail conditions the right to receive necessary care or necessities on the payment of such fees.

  7. LaPlante v. Lovelace

    Case No. 2:13-cv-32 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 9, 2013)   Cited 20 times
    Holding no constitutional deprivation where the plaintiff was offered indoor recreation on only seven occasions over two-month period

    Federal courts consistently have held that prisoners have no constitutional right to purchase products at regular retail prices. See, e.g., McCall v. Keefe Supply Co., 71 F. App'x 779, 780 (10th Cir. 2003) (allegation that prisoner was overcharged for goods at prison commissary failed to state a constitutional claim); French v. Butterworth, 614 F.2d 23, 25 (1st Cir. 1980) (no legal basis exists for a demand that inmates be offered items for purchase at or near cost; Griffin v. Doe, No. 1:10-cv-1987, 2011 WL 94563, at *1 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 11, 2011) ("Prisoners have no constitutional right to purchase products at the same price as charged in retail stores."); Simpson v. Caruso, No. 1:09-cv-245, 2009 WL 1010973, at *3 (W.D. Mich. Apr. 14, 2009) (same); Floyd v. Emmet Cnty. Corr. Facility, No. 1:06-cv-283, 2006 WL 1429536, at *4 (W.D. Mich. May 23, 2006) (same).

  8. Hernandez v. Pugh

    CASE NO. 4:12CV0923 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 10, 2012)   Cited 1 times

    Courts have consistently held that prisoners have no constitutional right to purchase products at the same price as charged in retail stores. See e.g. Griffin v. Doe, No. 1:10CV1987, 2011 WL 94563, at *1 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 11, 2011); Simpson v. Caruso, No. 1:09-cv-245, 2009 WL 1010973, at * 3 (W.D. Mich. April. 14, 2009); Floyd v. Emmet County Correctional Facility, No. 1:06-CV-283, 2006 WL 1429536, at * 4 (W.D. Mich. May 23, 2006) (prisoners have no constitutionally guaranteed right to purchase commissary items at the same or lower price than charged at regular retail stores); McCall v. Keefe Supply Co., 71 Fed.Appx. 779, 780 (10th Cir. 2003) (allegation that prisoner was overcharged for goods at prison commissary failed to state a constitutional claim); French v. Butterworth, 614 F.2d 23, 25 (1st Cir. 1980) (no legal basis exists for a demand that inmates be offered items for purchase at or near cost). b. Allegedly Discriminatory Statements by Defendant Pugh

  9. Terry v. Calhoun Cnty. Corr. Facility

    Case No. 1:12-cv-347 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 19, 2012)   Cited 3 times
    In Terry v. Calhoun County Correctional Facility, 2012 WL 5198376, at *6 (W.D. Mich. Oct.19, 2012), the federal district court found the plaintiff inmate had sufficiently alleged that the sheriff had a policy or custom of preventing inmates from communicating with newspaper reporters, and thus allowed his First Amendment claim to proceed.

    Courts consistently have held that prisoners have no constitutional right to purchase products at the same price as charged in retail stores. See, e.g., Griffin v. Doe, No. 1:10CV1987, 2011 WL 94563, at *1 (N.D. Ohio Jan.11, 2011); Simpson v. Caruso, No. 1:09-cv-245, 2009 WL 1010973, at * 3 (W.D. Mich. Apr. 14, 2009); Floyd v. Emmet County Correctional Facility, No. 1:06-CV-283, 2006 WL 1429536, at * 4 (W.D. Mich. May 23, 2006) (prisoners have no constitutionally guaranteed right to purchase commissary items at the same or lower price than charged at regular retail stores); McCall v. Keefe Supply Co., 71 F. App'x 779, 780 (10th Cir. 2003) (allegation that prisoner was overcharged for goods at prison commissary failed to state a constitutional claim); French v. Butterworth, 614 F.2d 23, 25 (1st Cir. 1980) (no legal basis exists for a demand that inmates be offered items for purchase at or near cost). Likewise, inmates at a county jail have no constitutional right to purchase products at the same price as charged at a commissary operated by the MDOC.

  10. Marte v. Pugh

    CASE NO. 4:12 CV 0922 (N.D. Ohio Jul. 30, 2012)   Cited 2 times

    Courts have consistently held that prisoners have no constitutional right to purchase products at the same price as charged in retail stores. See e.g. Griffin v. Doe, 2011 WL 94563 at *1 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 11, 2011); Simpson v. Caruso, 2009 WL 1010973 at * 3 (W.D. Mich. April. 14, 2009); Floyd v. Emmet County Correctional Facility, 2006 WL 1429536 at * 4 (W.D. Mich. May 23, 2006) (prisoners have no constitutionally guaranteed right to purchase commissary items at the same or lower price than charged at regular retail stores); McCall v. Keefe Supply Co., 2003 WL 21716435 at * 1 (10th Cir. July 25, 2003) (allegation that prisoner was overcharged for goods at prison commissary failed to state a constitutional claim); French v. Butterworth, 614 F.2d 23, 25 (1st Cir. 1980) (no legal basis exists for a demand that inmates be offered items for purchase at or near cost). b. Discriminatory Statements by Defendant Pugh