United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Kristine G. Baker United States District Judge.
Court has reviewed the two sets of Proposed Findings and
Recommendations submitted by United States Magistrate Judge
Jerome T. Kearney (Dkt. Nos. 12, 29). Plaintiff Jesse Radford
filed objections to both sets of Proposed Findings and
Recommendations (Dkt. Nos. 14, 32). After careful review of
the two sets of Proposed Findings and Recommendations, a
de novo review of the record, and a review of all
objections, the Court adopts the first set and the second set
of Proposed Findings and Recommendations as its findings in
all respects (Dkt. Nos. 12, 29).
Radford filed his original complaint pro se pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging various unrelated claims
against defendants Daryl Golden, Thomas Hurst, Temeka
Pickett, and Corporal Savage (Dkt. No. 1). Judge Kearney
directed Mr. Radford to file an amended complaint that sets
forth “one claim (referring to one incident)” and
(1) the name of each individual personally involved in the
actions at issue in the complaint; (2) how each individual
was personally involved in those actions; (3) how each
individual violated the Plaintiff's constitutional
rights; and 4) how he was harmed.
(Dkt. No. 5, at 4 (emphasis omitted)). In response, Mr.
Radford filed an amended complaint (Dkt. No. 7). Judge
Kearney noted that the amended complaint “cites only
statement of law” and again directed Mr. Radford to
file another amended complaint in compliance with the
Court's prior Order (Dkt. No. 10). Mr. Radford then filed
his second amended complaint, again alleging claims against
Mr. Golden, Mr. Hurst, Ms. Pickett, and Corporal Savage (Dkt.
Radford later filed a motion for preliminary injunction (Dkt.
No. 26). In this motion, Mr. Radford asserts that, while this
action has been pending, he has been “forced to come in
contact” with Ms. Pickett (Id., at 1). Mr.
Radford also states that he is afraid that he will be
retaliated against (Id.). As relief, Mr. Radford
asks this Court to disallow any further contact between him
and Ms. Pickett and to transfer him “to a safe unit of
ADC away from Defendants Daryl Golden and [Ms.]
Pickett.” (Id., at 1-2).
Radford's second amended complaint alleges claims
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, including claims that: (1)
Corporal Savage filed a false disciplinary against Mr.
Radford; (2) Mr. Hurst was involved in extending Mr.
Radford's time in isolation; (3) Ms. Pickett sexually
assaulted him and filed a retaliatory disciplinary against
Mr. Radford; and (4) that Mr. Golden did not respond to Mr.
Radford's request for law library materials (Dkt. No. 11,
at 1-6). For the reasons discussed below, the Court adopts
both Proposed Findings and Recommendations submitted by Judge
Kearney as its findings in all respects (Dkt. Nos. 12, 29).
The Court therefore dismisses without prejudice Mr.
Radford's claims against Mr. Golden, Mr. Hurst, and
Corporal Savage. The Court also denies Mr. Radford's
motion for preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 26).
The First Set Of Proposed Findings and
first set of Proposed Findings and Recommendations recommends
the dismissal without prejudice of Mr. Radford's claims
against Corporal Savage, Mr. Golden, and Mr. Hurst for
failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and
for violating the Court's prior Order to amend the
complaint to allege only one claim (Dkt. No. 12). Mr. Radford
filed a timely objection, arguing that he did sufficiently
allege a claim against Mr. Golden because he attached a
grievance form that shows that Mr. Golden was aware that Mr.
Radford was denied access to the law library (Dkt. No. 14).
Court concludes that Mr. Radford has not sufficiently alleged
a claim against Mr. Golden. The Eighth Circuit Court of
Appeals has made it clear that being “the reader”
of a grievance or the “decision maker” in the
appeal of a grievance is not sufficient to make such an
individual a party to the “grieved incident.”
Champion v. Akins, 498 Fed. App'x 670, 670 (8th
Cir. 2013); see also Rowe v. Norris, 198 Fed.
App'x 579, 580 (8th Cir. 2006) (determining that ADC
deputy director's denial of grievances was insufficient
to impose § 1983 liability on him). Instead, to satisfy
the Prison Litigation Reform Act's exhaustion
requirement, a prisoner must file a grievance specifically
alleging that the “reader” or “decision
maker” was personally “involved in the grieved
incident.” Champion, 498 Fed. App'x at
670. Mr. Radford's only allegations against Mr. Golden
are that: (1) Mr. Golden did not terminate Corporal Savage
after Mr. Radford wrote a grievance and (2) Mr. Golden was
aware, via a grievance filed by Mr. Radford, that
Mr. Radford was denied access to the law library (Dkt. No.
11, at 1-3). As Mr. Radford has not alleged that Mr. Golden
was personally “involved in the grieved incident[s],
” the Court dismisses without prejudice Mr.
Radford's claims against Mr. Golden.
Court also concludes that Mr. Radford has not sufficiently
alleged claims against Mr. Hurst or Corporal Savage. Mr.
Radford's second amended complaint fails to allege with
specificity any action taken by Mr. Hurst that purportedly
caused injury to Mr. Radford. Furthermore, while Mr. Radford
does allege that Corporal Savage filed a false disciplinary
charge against him, this allegation, without more, fails to
support a claim for relief under § 1983. See Dixon
v. Brown, 38 F.3d 379, 379 (8th Cir. 1994) (holding that
the filing of a false disciplinary charge is not itself
actionable under § 1983, but the filing of a
disciplinary charge does become actionable if done in
retaliation for the inmate's filing of a grievance).
Here, Mr. Radford alleges that Corporal Savage falsely filed
a disciplinary charge against him due to a fight he had with
her brother (Dkt. No. 11, at 1). As this purportedly false
disciplinary charge was not allegedly brought in retaliation
for Mr. Radford's exercise of his protected rights, this
claim is not actionable under § 1983. Accordingly, the
Court dismisses without prejudice Mr. Radford's claims
against Mr. Hurst and Corporal Savage.
The Second Set Of Proposed Findings ...