Demarkus Adams v. Chadd Tyler

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana grants in part and denies in part Defendant Chadd Tyler's partial motion for summary judgment in Demarkus Adams's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The court grants summary judgment on the First Amendment retaliation claim because the record does not support that Tyler knew of or was motivated by Adams's grievance, but denies summary judgment on the Eighth Amendment excessive-force claim because disputed evidence concerning the takedown, tasering, strikes, and post-restraint force creates genuine issues for trial. The court also grants Adams's renewed motion for appointment of counsel.

Holdings

1. Summary judgment was improper because the evidence, viewed in Adams's favor, could support a finding that Tyler's use of force was more than de minimis and was malicious or excessive rather than a good-faith effort to maintain or restore discipline.
2. Tyler was entitled to summary judgment on Adams's First Amendment retaliation claim because Adams presented no evidence that he engaged in protected activity before Tyler filed the conduct report, and no evidence that Tyler knew of or was motivated by Adams's later grievance.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence created a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Tyler's force in tackling, striking, tasing, and handling Adams was excessive under the Eighth Amendment.
2. Whether Adams presented evidence that Tyler retaliated against him for protected First Amendment activity by filing a conduct report or taking other adverse action.

Disposition

other