You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Varszegi v. Strom

Citation: 324 F. App'x 85Docket: No. 07-1597-pr

Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; April 28, 2009; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Paul Varszegi appeals a judgment from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, where he filed a forty-four count complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 against corrections officers, prison officials, doctors, and an assistant state prosecutor, alleging violations of his constitutional rights and Connecticut law. The district court granted summary judgment for all claims in a ruling dated March 23, 2007. After reviewing Varszegi's arguments, the appellate court finds them meritless and affirms the lower court's decision, citing the district court's thorough reasoning. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Review of District Court Decisions

Application: The appellate court reviewed Varszegi's challenges to the district court's decision and found them to be without merit, thus affirming the lower court's ruling.

Reasoning: After reviewing Varszegi's arguments, the appellate court finds them meritless and affirms the lower court's decision, citing the district court's thorough reasoning.

Claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1988

Application: Varszegi's complaint included claims alleging violations of constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, which were dismissed by the district court through summary judgment.

Reasoning: Paul Varszegi appeals a judgment from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, where he filed a forty-four count complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 against corrections officers, prison officials, doctors, and an assistant state prosecutor, alleging violations of his constitutional rights and Connecticut law.

Summary Judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56

Application: The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, indicating that there were no genuine disputes of material fact and the defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Reasoning: The district court granted summary judgment for all claims in a ruling dated March 23, 2007.