ABSTRACT
The Magistrate trying Hudson v. Palmer District Court suit under 42 U. S. C. § 1983 found that the officers used force when there was no need to do so and that Mezo expressly condoned their actions, ruled that respondents had violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments, and awarded Hudson damages. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding, inter alia, that inmates alleging use of excessive force in violation of the Amendment must prove “significant injury” and that Hudson could not prevail because his injuries were “minor” and required no medical attention. The latter court answered the constitutional question, finding that the hitching post’s use for punitive purposes violated the Eighth Amendment. At the trial’s conclusion, the District Court instructed the jury that v. Hendrickson Kingsley was required to prove, inter alia, that the officers “recklessly disregarded safety” and “acted with reckless disregard of his rights.”.
