Marcus Williams v. Dell Baker, M. Truxell, M. Kirkey, J. Parsons

Summary

This Report and Recommendation addresses defendants’ motion to dismiss and for summary judgment in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action brought by MDOC inmate Marcus Williams. The magistrate judge recommends denying the motion as to Williams’s Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim against Dell Baker, while granting it as to the remaining claims, including claims against M. Truxell, M. Kirkey, and J. Parsons. The recommendation analyzes PLRA exhaustion and the sufficiency of Williams’s retaliation, discrimination, due process, and deliberate-indifference claims.

Holdings

1. The recommendation concluded that Williams exhausted his race-discrimination claim against Baker because he raised racial discrimination in his Step II appeal and MDOC officials considered the grievance on its merits rather than rejecting it for the procedural defect.
2. The recommendation concluded that Baker was not entitled to dismissal of Williams's Fourteenth Amendment equal-protection claim because the alleged racial slur, conflicting termination explanations, and related allegations plausibly supported an inference that Baker terminated Williams because of race.
3. The recommendation concluded that Williams failed to properly exhaust his First Amendment retaliation claim against Baker because none of the relevant grievance steps alleged that Baker terminated him in retaliation.
4. The recommendation concluded that Williams failed to exhaust claims against Kirkey and Parsons because neither defendant was identified in the relevant Step I grievances and the grievance concerning unspecified administration was not considered on its merits.
5. The recommendation concluded that Williams's due-process claim failed because a prisoner has no protected liberty or property interest in a particular prison job or in prison employment generally.
6. The recommendation concluded that termination from a prison job, even if unjustified, did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
7. The recommendation concluded that Williams failed to state a § 1983 claim against Truxell because the allegations showed, at most, awareness, failure to supervise, failure to respond to grievances, or failure to act, rather than personal participation in unconstitutional conduct.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Williams properly exhausted his Fourteenth Amendment racial-discrimination claim against Baker.
2. Whether Williams properly exhausted his First Amendment retaliation claim against Baker.
3. Whether Williams exhausted claims against Kirkey and Parsons.
4. Whether Williams plausibly stated an equal-protection claim against Baker based on his termination from a prison job.
5. Whether termination from a prison job stated a Fourteenth Amendment procedural-due-process claim.
6. Whether termination from a prison job stated an Eighth Amendment cruel-and-unusual-punishment claim.
7. Whether Williams's claims against Truxell failed because he alleged only supervisory inaction, failure to respond to grievances, or failure to supervise.

Disposition

other