Hawley v. Salamon

United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania · May 30, 2025 · No. 3:23-cv-01434

Summary

This memorandum addresses a pro se prisoner’s Section 1983 civil rights action alleging Eighth and Fourth Amendment violations related to prison conditions and strip searches at SCI-Rockview. The court reviews the plaintiff’s objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation that recommended dismissal for failure to file an opposition brief. Applying the Poulis factors and Rule 12(b)(6) standards, the court evaluates the merits of the claims, finding that while some allegations regarding basic issue and hygiene items are insufficient, the claims concerning severe cell conditions and humiliating strip searches present plausible constitutional violations that will survive dismissal.

Court
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Writing for the Court
Julia K. Munley
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Decision date
May 30, 2025
Docket number
3:23-cv-01434
Procedural posture
Court ruling on plaintiff's objections to magistrate judge's report and recommendation and on defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint.
Standard of review
de novo
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
other

Topics

prisoners rightscivil rightsfirst amendmentfourth amendment

Practice areas

civil rightscivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss the action for failure to prosecute should be adopted.
  2. Whether the defendants' motion to dismiss should be granted in part and denied in part based on the plausibility of the plaintiff's Section 1983 claims.
  3. Whether the plaintiff's First, Fourth, and Eighth Amendment claims survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.

Holdings

  1. The court declined to adopt the recommendation and will not dismiss the action with prejudice.
  2. The motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part. Claims relating to the three‑day denial of clothing, bedding, toiletries and the ongoing denial of hygiene packets, razors, and nail clippers are dismissed with prejudice. The plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claims are dismissed except as they relate to the strip‑search and squalid‑cell allegations. All remaining claims against Warden Salamon, Major Haldeman, COs Jenks, Shafer, Hershey, Corman, Fye, Hayles, and two John Doe officers are allowed to proceed.

Key quotations

The court will make a finding that Hawley failed to fulfill a court‑ordered obligation. But the court will not dispose of this action in a summary manner. (at 10)
If the case is close, doubts should be resolved in favor of reaching a decision on the merits. (at 33)

Factual background

Antonio James Hawley, an inmate at SCI‑Rockview, was transferred to a restricted‑housing unit where he was denied clothing, bedding and toiletries for three days, subjected to multiple strip searches, and confined in an unsanitary cell for 48 days without showers or yard time. He filed a Section 1983 complaint alleging violations of his First, Fourth, and Eighth Amendment rights.

Procedural history

Plaintiff filed a Section 1983 action. Magistrate Judge Carlson issued a report and recommendation to dismiss for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff filed objections. The district court is now deciding those objections and the underlying motion to dismiss.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…