Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Wiley v. Caldwell

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Eastern Division

November 16, 2017

KENDRICK WILEY ADC #139566 PLAINTIFF
v.
MIRANDA CALDWELL, et al. DEFENDANTS

          FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

         INSTRUCTIONS

         The following proposed Findings and Recommendation have been sent to United States District Judge J. Leon Holmes. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection, and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of fact.

         DISPOSITION

         I. Introduction

         Plaintiff Kendrick Wiley filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on March 8, 2017, alleging that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs while he was jailed in the Monroe County Detention Center in February 2017. Doc. No. 2. Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, a brief in support, and a statement of facts claiming that Wiley had not exhausted claims against them before he filed this lawsuit (Doc. Nos. 14-16). Wiley did not file a response to the Defendants' motion. Because Wiley failed to controvert the facts set forth in Defendants' statement of undisputed facts, Doc. No. 16, those facts are deemed admitted. See Local Rule 56.1(c). The Defendants' statement, and the other pleadings and exhibits in the record, establish that the material facts are not in dispute and that Defendants are entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.

         II. Standard of Review

         Under Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment is proper “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 321 (1986). When ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the court must view the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Naucke v. City of Park Hills, 284 F.3d 923, 927 (8th Cir. 2002). The nonmoving party may not rely on allegations or denials, but must demonstrate the existence of specific facts that create a genuine issue for trial. Mann v. Yarnell, 497 F.3d 822, 825 (8th Cir. 2007). The nonmoving party's allegations must be supported by sufficient probative evidence that would permit a finding in his favor on more than mere speculation, conjecture, or fantasy. Id. (citations omitted). A dispute is genuine if the evidence is such that it could cause a reasonable jury to return a verdict for either party; a fact is material if its resolution affects the outcome of the case. Othman v. City of Country Club Hills, 671 F.3d 672, 675 (8th Cir. 2012). Disputes that are not genuine or that are about facts that are not material will not preclude summary judgment. Sitzes v. City of West Memphis, Ark., 606 F.3d 461, 465 (8th Cir. 2010).

         III. Undisputed Facts

         1. Wiley did not file a grievance complaining about the matters alleged in this lawsuit. Doc. No. 2 at 3.

         2. The Monroe County Detention Center had a grievance process in place in 2017 for inmates to raise concerns about alleged constitutional violations, including, but not limited to, not receiving appropriate medical treatment. See Doc. No. 16-1 & 16-3.

         3. Before he filed this lawsuit in 2017, Wiley submitted grievances in 2016 concerning medical issues unrelated to his current claims.

         4. Wiley was familiar with the Monroe County Detention Center grievance process when he filed this lawsuit in 2017. See Doc. No. 16-1 & 16-2.

         5. Wiley is no longer incarcerated at the Monroe County Detention Center. See Doc. No. 16-1.

         6. Wiley has provided no evidence to substantiate his claim that detention center staff deterred him, or any other detainees, from submitting grievances while ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.