Charles Flynn v. Illinois Department of Corrections, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois dismissed Charles Flynn’s Second Amended Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The court held that Flynn failed to state a First Amendment access-to-courts claim concerning allegedly missing outgoing legal mail and failed to state constitutional claims based on alleged conduct by prison law-library personnel and grievance officials. The dismissal was with prejudice, counted as a potential strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and the clerk was directed to close the case and enter judgment.

Holdings

1. Plaintiff failed to state a First Amendment claim based on the alleged nonreceipt or theft of mail sent to the Mason and Sangamon County Circuit Clerks because he did not identify which defendants were responsible for the alleged interference.
2. The alleged failure by Defendant Hunt to provide an order accompanying a fee-waiver application and Defendant Ross's initial refusal to provide a copy of the order did not state cognizable constitutional claims.
3. The denial or mishandling of a prison grievance, without more, does not establish a constitutional violation, and high-level officials generally cannot be held liable merely because they denied a grievance concerning a completed act of misconduct.
4. The Second Amended Complaint was dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A because further amendment would be futile.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the allegations that prison mail was stolen or failed to reach the Mason and Sangamon County Circuit Clerks stated a First Amendment access-to-courts claim.
2. Whether the alleged failure by prison employees to provide or copy an order concerning a waiver of court fees stated a constitutional claim.
3. Whether prison officials incurred constitutional liability by denying, mishandling, or concurring in the denial of plaintiff's grievances.
4. Whether the Second Amended Complaint should be dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

Disposition

dismissed