WOODMAN v. CUNNINGHAM Case Brief
Audio lesson available for this case
LSD+ subscribers can listen to a recorded discussion of this brief - the full facts, holding, and reasoning in audio form.
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A prisoner challenged the forfeiture of his good-time credits after escaping, arguing they hadn’t fully “accrued.” The court deferred to the prison warden’s long-standing administrative interpretation that credits accrue upfront at sentencing, upholding the forfeiture.
Legal Significance: Reinforces the principle of judicial deference to a long-standing, plausible statutory interpretation by the administrative agency responsible for its implementation, especially where the legislature has acquiesced through inaction.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
The plaintiff, an inmate serving a life sentence with an 18-year minimum, was credited with 1,620 days of “statutory good time credits” at the start of his sentence. This calculation was based on the prison warden’s long-standing administrative practice of computing credits based on a prisoner’s minimum sentence, not time served. This practice determined a prisoner’s initial parole eligibility date. In 1981, the plaintiff escaped. Upon recapture, the warden, acting under his interpretation of the governing statute, forfeited all 1,620 days of the plaintiff’s credits. The plaintiff filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that the credits had not yet been “earned” or “accrued” because they should be calculated based on actual time served. He contended that only the portion of credits corresponding to his time served could be forfeited. The warden countered that the credits accrued in their entirety at the time of sentencing, consistent with the agency’s established interpretation.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did the prison warden permissibly interpret the governing statute to mean that a prisoner’s statutory good conduct credits are “earned” and “accrued” in their entirety at the beginning of a sentence for the purpose of forfeiture?
Yes. The court held that the warden’s interpretation was proper, and the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliqui
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Did the prison warden permissibly interpret the governing statute to mean that a prisoner’s statutory good conduct credits are “earned” and “accrued” in their entirety at the beginning of a sentence for the purpose of forfeiture?
Conclusion
This case provides a clear application of administrative deference, illustrating how courts Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim ve
Legal Rule
Where a statute's meaning is ambiguous, the long-standing, practical, and plausible interpretation Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo c
Legal Analysis
The court's decision rests primarily on the principle of deference to an Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Exce
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Statutory good conduct credits calculated at the beginning of a sentence