United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Northern Division
JAMES HUMBLE JR. ADC #117144 PLAINTIFF
A SCHUBERT, et al. DEFENDANTS
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
following proposed Findings and Recommendation have been sent
to Chief United States District Judge Brian S. Miller. 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
James Humble Jr. filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 on September 12, 2016, alleging that unidentified
Doe defendants violated his constitutional rights by denying
him adequate mental health care (Doc. No. 2). Humble
subsequently filed an amended complaint naming specific
defendants (Doc. No. 5). Humble sues Defendants in their
official capacities and seeks injunctive relief. Doc. No. 5
at 2 & 5.
filed a motion for summary judgment, a brief in support, and
a statement of facts claiming that Humble had not exhausted
claims against them before he filed this lawsuit (Doc. Nos.
21-23). In support of their motion for summary judgment,
Defendants submitted: Humble's status assignment sheet
from April 28, 2016, to October 25, 2016; a copy of the
Arkansas Department of Correction's grievance policy; and
a declaration of Inmate Grievance Coordinator Terry Grigsby
Brown (Doc. Nos. 23-1 - 23-3).
did not file a response to the Defendants' motion.
Because Humble failed to controvert the facts set forth in
Defendants' statement of undisputed facts, Doc. No. 23,
those facts are deemed admitted. See Local Rule
56.1(c). The Defendants' statement of facts, 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.
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).
Humble is an inmate incarcerated in the North Central Unit in
Calico Rock, Arkansas. Doc. No. 2 & 5.
defendants are employed by the Arkansas Department of
Correction (ADC) and are assigned to the North Central Unit.
Humble alleges the defendants have been deliberately
indifferent to his mental health needs. Id.
Humble does not specify in his complaint or amended complaint
when the alleged ...