SISNEY V. REISCH 754 N.W.2d 813 (2008) CASE BRIEF

SISNEY V. REISCH

754 N.W.2d 813 (2008)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Sisney (P) appealed a dismissal of his suit alleging that he was entitled to kosher meals under a prior settlement with another inmate.

FACTS: P filed a pro se complaint alleging that he was a third-party beneficiary of a settlement agreement between the Department of Corrections (DOC) and a former inmate. P claimed that DOC and penitentiary officials breached the settlement agreement when they did not provide him with pre-packaged, certified kosher meals. P pleaded that he is Jewish and follows a kosher diet as part of his religion. In 1998, inmate Philip Heftel filed a suit under 42 USC 1983 alleging that the DOC had deprived Heftel of his constitutional right to free exercise of the Jewish religion. The parties ultimately entered into a settlement agreement, which provided that the DOC 'agree[d] to provide a kosher diet to all Jewish inmates who request it,' and that the kosher diet would include '[p]repackaged meals which are certified kosher for noon and evening meals[.]'CBM Inc., quit serving prepackaged kosher meals and began serving a new kosher diet, including a rice and bean mixture prepared and cooked in the prison kitchen. P alleged that this change violated the Heftel Agreement and his religious beliefs. P submitted a grievance through DOC administrative procedures. D responded that P was not a party to the Heftel Agreement. The circuit court dismissed the suit, concluding that P's claim was barred by statutory immunity, and in addition, the complaint did not contain sufficient factual assertions supporting an inference that either D was responsible for enforcing the Agreement. It did not reach the issue of third party beneficiary status. P appealed.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner