Federal and State constitutional challenge the transfer, from work-release status at pre-release facilities to imprisonment inside a correctional institution, of individuals who had had exemplary institutional and work records, a far more severe and less merited deprivation than that complained of by Hudson). One of the “conditions . . . customarily applied” to inmates of Massachusetts prisons is, as the judge below accurately noted, the reasonable use of “awaiting action” status by correctional officials in managing their institutions, including its use in the form of administrative segregation as an investigative tool. See Lamoureux v. Superintendent, Mass. Correctional Inst., Walpole, 390 Mass. 409, 411-412 n.7 (1983). Cf. Royce v. Commissioner of Correction, 390 Mass, at 429-430 (<HOLDING>). Being placed in administrative segregation on
holding that placement in awaiting action in an administrative segregation area is an acceptable status pending an investigation or a disciplinary hearing but it is a temporary status and may not be used for an unreasonable or indefinite time and keeping an inmate in it for two years without a hearing or any review was unreasonable holding that a section 1983 suit against an officer in his or her official capacity is simply another way of pleading an action against an entity of which an officer is an agent holding that 24 foreclosure for an unreasonable length of time is substantial recognizing that a state courts determination is not an unreasonable application of law merely because it is erroneous holding that an action for the negligence of an architect in the performance of professional services is an action for breach of contract