United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Northern Division
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
Diane Jones filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983 alleging that defendants Cheryl Chapman and Stephanie
Lachance were deliberately indifferent to her mental health
needs and failed to protect her and others from herself (Doc.
filed a motion for summary judgment, a brief in support, and
a statement of facts claiming that Jones had not exhausted
claims against them before she filed this lawsuit (Doc. Nos.
14-16). In support of their motion for summary judgment,
Defendants submitted: a declaration of Inmate Grievance
Coordinator Terry Brown Grigsby and a copy of the Arkansas
Department of Correction's grievance policy (Doc. Nos.
14-1 & 14-2).
did not file a response to the Defendants' motion.
Because Jones 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 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.
Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary
judgment is proper if “the movant shows that there is
no genuine dispute 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(a); 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). An assertion that a fact cannot be
disputed or is genuinely disputed must be supported by
materials in the record such as “depositions,
documents, electronically stored information, affidavits or
declarations, stipulations (including those made for purposes
of the motion only), admissions, interrogatory answers, or
other materials . . .”. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1)(A). A
party may also show that a fact is disputed or undisputed by
“showing that the materials cited do not establish the
absence or presence of a genuine dispute, or that an adverse
party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the
fact.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1)(B). 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).
Jones is an inmate incarcerated in the McPherson Unit of the
Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC) located in Newport,
Arkansas. Doc. No. 2.
Jones filed this pro se lawsuit on April 27, 2017,
alleging that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to
her mental health needs by failing to protect her or others
from herself during an incident occurring on April 9, 2017.
defendants are employed by the ADC and are assigned to the
McPherson Unit. Id.
Since April 2014, Administrative Directive (AD) 14-16 has
been in effect. AD 14-16, the Inmate Grievance Procedure
policy, is the “administrative mechanism for the
resolution of complaints and ...