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.

White v. Jackson

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

June 19, 2019

CLIFFORD LEE WHITE, JR. ADC #145996 PLAINITFF
v.
MOSES JACKSON, III, et al. DEFENDANTS

          RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

         I. Procedure for Filing Objections

         This Recommended Disposition (Recommendation) has been sent to Judge Billy Roy Wilson. Mr. White may file written objections to this Recommendation if he disagrees with its findings or conclusions. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for your objection.

         To be considered, objections must be received in the office of the Court Clerk within 14 days of this Recommendation. If no objections are filed, Judge Wilson can adopt this Recommendation without independently reviewing the record. By not objecting, Mr. White may waive any right to appeal questions of fact.

         II. Discussion

         A. Background

         Clifford Lee White, Jr., an Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC) inmate, originally filed this civil rights lawsuit in the Western District of Arkansas. (Docket entry #1) On the same day, the District Court for the Western District of Arkansas issued an Order allowing Mr. White to proceed on his claims against CCS Staff and Nurse Smith in the Western District (#3) and transferring Mr. White's claims against the remaining Defendants to this Court. (Id.)

         After this Court granted Mr. White's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Clerk of Court filed Mr. White's addendum to his original complaint.[1] (#6) The Court has carefully reviewed the original complaint and the addendum.

         B. Screening

         The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) requires federal courts to screen prisoner complaints, such as Mr. White's, that seek relief from a governmental entity, officer, or employee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Before ordering service of process, the Court is obliged to dismiss any claims that are legally frivolous or malicious; that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from paying damages. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).

         1. Violation of ADC Policy

         In the addendum to his complaint, Mr. White complains that ADC officials violated a number of ADC policies and procedures. Unfortunately for Mr. White, the prison's failure to follow its own policies or procedures is not conduct that rises to the level of a constitutional violation. McClinton v. Arkansas Dep't of Corr., 166 Fed.Appx. 260 (8th Cir. 2006) (citing Kennedy v. Blankenship, 100 F.3d 640, 643 (8th Cir. 1996)). The allegations regarding Defendants' failure to abide by ADC policies fail to state a federal claim for relief.

         2. Failure to Process Grievances

         In his addendum, Mr. White also complains that ADC officials consistently failed to properly process his grievances. As with the failure to follow prison policies, there is no right of action based on access to a grievance procedure. Lomholt v. Holder, 287 F.3d 683, 684 (8th Cir. 2002) and Buckley v. Barlow, 997 F.2d 494, 495 (8th Cir. 1993). Therefore, a prison official's ...


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.