ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Religion & Law Blogs -> Religion Clause

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Religion & Law

: Religion Clause

Court Rejects Equitable Relief In Inmate's Request To Prevent Autopsy

By Howard M. Friedman

ADVERTISEMENTS
In Arthur v. Allen, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58167 (SD AL, July 31, 2008), an Alabama federal district court refused to grant a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction to a death row inmate seeking to prevent the state from performing an autopsy on his body after his execution. Convicted murderer Thomas Arthur claimed the autopsy would violate his sincerely held religious beliefs. Arthur's execution date has been repeatedly delayed for over ten years as various challenges have been filed, and in 2007 his daughter unsuccessfully sought an order from the court to bar an autopsy on her father's body after his execution. (See prior posting.) The current lawsuit was filed by Arthur just days before his then-execution date (which was subsequently again delayed). The court denied Arthur's request on both equitable and statute of limitations grounds. It said:
Arthur suddenly invokes the equitable power of this Court, just two days before the scheduled execution, seeking to restrain the State, without a full hearing on the merits, from performing on autopsy on his body. The timing of this action bears the unmistakable taint of an ambush, an exercise in eleventh-hour gamesmanship with the intent to procure an unfair strategic advantage over defendants. Such conduct is the very antithesis of the equitable, diligent, good-faith, vigilant conduct required of a litigant seeking equitable relief.
In addition the court held that the statute of limitations for filing a claim under 42 USC 1983 had run, holding that even though Arthur seeks prospective relief, his cause of action accrued "not at the time of the autopsy, but when the facts which would support a cause of action should have been apparent to a person with a reasonably prudent regard for his rights."

Full post as published by Religion Clause on August 06, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0129 secs (new cache)