Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Lamont Bernard Heard v. Yarnice Strange, et al.
Date: 01-23-2025
Case Number: 21-CV-10237
Judge: Nancy G. Edmunds
Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Wayne County)
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Detroit Civil Rights Lawyer Directory
Defendant's Attorney: Michigan Attorney General's Office
Description:
Detroit, Michigan civil rights lawyer represented the Plaintiff complaining about prison condictions.
isoners often have complaints about prison life. When these complaints arise, prisoners can't go straight to federal court. The Prison Litigation Reform Act("PLRAâ€) requires prisoners to seek relief from state prison officials before filing a federal lawsuit. This is called an "exhaustion†requirement since prisoners must exhaust their
administrative remedies before suing.
isoners often have complaints about prison life. When these complaints arise, prisoners can't go straight to federal court. The Prison Litigation Reform Act("PLRAâ€) requires prisoners to seek relief from state prison officials before filing a federal lawsuit. This is called an "exhaustion†requirement since prisoners must exhaust their
administrative remedies before suing.
Outcome:
Dismissal affirmed.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Lamont Bernard Heard v. Yarnice Strange, et al.?
The outcome was: Dismissal affirmed.
Which court heard Lamont Bernard Heard v. Yarnice Strange, et al.?
This case was heard in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Wayne County), MI. The presiding judge was Nancy G. Edmunds.
Who were the attorneys in Lamont Bernard Heard v. Yarnice Strange, et al.?
Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here For The Best Detroit Civil Rights Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Michigan Attorney General's Office.
When was Lamont Bernard Heard v. Yarnice Strange, et al. decided?
This case was decided on January 23, 2025.