United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Western Division
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
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.
Michael Alan Stacy and Jonathan Porter filed this pro
se civil rights complaint against Sheriff Tim Ryals in
his official capacity while incarcerated at the Faulkner
County Detention Center (“FCDC”). Doc. No. 2.
Stacy and Porter alleged that they had been denied adequate
recreational opportunities while incarcerated at the FCDC.
Id. Porter and Stacy did not specify what type of
relief they sought. Id. at 5. Porter's lawsuit
was subsequently dismissed for failure to prosecute. See
Porter v. Rice, et al., No. 4:17-cv-00236.
the Court are Defendant Ryals' motion for summary
judgment, supporting brief, and statement of undisputed facts
(Doc. Nos. 39-41) as well as Stacy's response (Doc. No.
43) and Ryals' reply (Doc. No. 44). The pleadings and
exhibits in the record establish that the material facts are
not in dispute and Ryals is entitled to judgment as a matter
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).
facts listed below are taken from those submitted by
Defendant Ryals that are supported by the following
documents: an affidavit by Chris Reidmueller, jail
administrator at the FCDC, along with “tower pass
down” logs covering the time period in question and a
copy of the FCDC's exercise policy (Doc. No. 41-1); and
an affidavit by Gary Andrews, a Lieutenant at the FCDC (Doc.
No. 44-1). The Court also includes those facts submitted by
Stacy in his response that are supported by documents of
record. Disputed facts are noted.
was an inmate in the FCDC during the time period (March 26
through April 11, 2017) that he alleged he was denied regular
exercise outside his cell. According to Reidmueller, Stacy
was housed in two cells during that period: cell 212 and the
Large Holding Cell (number 200). See Doc. No. 41-1
at 2. Stacy maintains he was housed in the Large Holding Cell
and not in cell 212. See Doc. No. 43. The tower pass
down logs show that Stacy was in fact housed in the Large
Holding Cell during the majority (if not all) of the time
period in question. See Doc. No. 41-1 at 14, 36, 41,
45-46, 63, 90 & 95. There is one notation that indicates
Stacy may have been housed in or moved to cell 212 on March
30, 2017. See Id. at 29 (“15:00 Stacy from
Large Holding Cell 212). Stacy also maintains he was held in
cell 200 until sometime in May for a total of about 60 days.
See Doc. No. 43 at 3-5. Stacy filed a copy of a
grievance dated May 8, 2017, stating he had not had
recreation call in cell 200 for more than five days. See
Id. at 13.
undisputed that Stacy was afforded time on the outside
recreation yard on four occasions during the 17-day period
described in Stacy's complaint. See Doc. No. 2
at 4; Doc. No. 41 at 1. A recreation period on the yard was
canceled on another occasion due to bad weather according to
the tower pass down logs, but Stacy maintains it was nice
that day. Doc. No. 41-1 at 1-2 & 44.
to Riedmueller, inmates at the FCDC are permitted to and
frequently do exercise in their cells. Doc. No. 41-1 at 2.
Riedmueller also notes that outside recreation is sometimes
not an option based on the weather and for other reasons.
Id. Riedmueller opines that both cell 212 and the
Large Holding Cell are large enough to do any number of
exercises, such as jumping jacks, pushups, and sit-ups.
Id. Cell 212 is comprised of several
“bedroom” pods around a central dayroom area
(where the cell's inmates spend most of their day), which
is large enough for the inmates to walk laps. Id.
The Large Holding Cell is one large room with bunks on the
wall which is large enough for stationary exercises according
to Riedmueller. Id. The Large Holding Cell measures
18 feet by 7 feet. Doc. No. 44-1 at 1. Stacy states that the
Large Holding Cell is not large enough for exercise of any
kind, with barely enough room for three inmates to sleep
(with two on beds and one on the floor). Doc. No. 43 at 1.
the period cited in Stacy's Complaint, Faulkner County
had a policy in place governing exercise and recreation
opportunities for inmates at the FCDC. Doc. No. 41-1 at 1
& 97. The policy provides that “[d]etainees shall
have the opportunity to engage in active, out of cell
exercise, for one hour per day five days per week.”
Id. The exercise area is designated as “[a]
room or any indoor or outdoor area set-aside [sic] for
exercises.” Id. The policy further provides
that detainees may use exercise areas for one hour daily,