Page 620
PRO SE
APPEAL FROM THE LINCOLN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT NO. 40CV-18-58.
HONORABLE JODI RAINES DENNIS, JUDGE.
COUNSEL:
Dexter
Harmon, appellant, Pro se.
Leslie
Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Rosalyn Middleton, Ass't
Att'y Gen., for appellee.
SHAWN
A. WOMACK, Associate Justice. BAKER, J., concurs without
opinion. HART, J., concurs in part; dissents in part.
OPINION
Page 621
SHAWN
A. WOMACK, Associate Justice
Dexter
Harmon sued Arkansas prison officials under the Arkansas
Civil Rights Act and state tort law for allegedly
depriving him of a nutritionally adequate diet that is safe
for consumption. He filed suit against Appellees in their
official and individual capacities. The circuit court
concluded that Harmon's complaint was barred by sovereign
and statutory immunity and failed to state facts upon which
relief could be granted. The court dismissed the action and
issued a strike. We affirm the dismissal but reverse the
strike.
I.
During
the relevant time period, Harmon was incarcerated at the
Varner Supermax Unit of the Arkansas Department of Correction
(ADC). In his pro se complaint, Harmon alleged that Appellees
failed to comply with an ADC administrative regulation and
unit policy concerning the food service at Varner Supermax.
He sought to hold Appellees liable for negligence and for
cruel and unusual punishment under the Arkansas Civil Rights
Act. He requested injunctive and declaratory relief and
reimbursement of costs.
Page 622
According to the complaint, Appellees consistently served
small portions of cold and unappetizing food. Harmon claimed
he was provided nutritionally inadequate, poorly seasoned,
and " regularly unappealing" food that "
tastes nasty." He also alleged that meals were delivered
by unqualified prison employees who had not been trained in
food service. He stated that employees did not wash their
hands, had poor personal hygiene, appeared sick, and wore
their regular uniforms while handling food. Harmon further
complained that the food was not kept at acceptable
temperatures. He accused Appellees of being deliberately
indifferent to these concerns by refusing to thoroughly
investigate his grievances and refusing to properly oversee
food distribution. As a result, Harmon alleged that he was
afraid to eat the food because he believed it was
contaminated and placed him at risk of contracting a
foodborne illness. According to Harmon, he consequently
suffered emotional harm, weight loss, energy loss, and
fatigue.
The
circuit court granted Appellees' motion to dismiss. The
court concluded that the complaint was barred by sovereign
and statutory immunity and failed to state facts upon which
relief could be granted.[1] The court also issued a strike
under ...