Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
ANDERSON v. LUTHER
March 11, 1981
MICHAEL ANDERSON, PLAINTIFF,
DENNIS LUTHER, WARDEN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Grady, District Judge.
This cause comes before the court on motion by the federal
defendants (Luther, Bettencourt and Marcadis, sued in their
official and individual capacities) for dismissal, and motion
by the state defendant (Irving, sued in his official and
individual capacity) for dismissal or, in the alternative, for
summary judgment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b), 56. For reasons
discussed below, we grant the motion of the federal defendants
for dismissal, and grant in part and deny in part the motion
of the state defendant for dismissal or summary judgment.
The facts, briefly summarized, are:
Plaintiff Anderson is a state prisoner presently
incarcerated in the Metropolitan Correctional Center in
Chicago, Illinois.*fn1 He was convicted of murder in 1970 and
sentenced to 25-50 years in prison.
Plaintiff had a parole hearing in front of defendant Irving,
Chairman of the Illinois Prisoner Review Board, in January
1980. At the time of this hearing, there was on his record an
institutional violation for engaging in sexual acts with
another, former, inmate. He had been charged with this conduct
on December 21, 1979; defendant Bettencourt had delivered the
"incident report" to him. On December 30, 1979, plaintiff had
been found "guilty" of the institutional violation by the
Institutional Disciplinary Committee, headed by defendant
Marcadis. He was "sentenced" to ten days in segregation ("the
hole"), which time had
been spent on the sixth floor of the MCC pending the
investigation, and was therefore considered served.*fn2
Plaintiff appealed the conviction to defendant Luther, Warden
of the MCC, which appeal was denied.
At the parole hearing, the conviction for sexual acts was
mentioned. See n. 2 supra. Plaintiff was denied parole on the
stated basis that it would "depreciate the seriousness of the
offense; murder." Plaintiff then appealed his conviction of the
institutional violation to the Regional Director of the Federal
Bureau of Prisons. His appeal was granted and the conviction
was expunged from his record on March 17, 1980.
On February 25, 1980, plaintiff had requested a
reconsideration of his denial of parole because one of his
co-defendants, who had been sentenced to 14-20 years in
prison, had been released on parole. This rehearing was
denied. On April 9, 1980, plaintiff requested a rehearing of
his denial of parole due to the expungement of the conviction
for sexual acts from his record. This, too, was denied by the
Illinois Prisoner Review Board, acting through defendant
Petitioner thereupon filed a petition for habeas corpus
which has been dismissed this day as being moot. Case No. 80
C 1523. See n. 3 supra. In May 1980, plaintiff filed the instant
action alleging deprivation of his constitutional rights by the
Plaintiff, who appears pro se, asserts three causes of
action against the defendants:
1. Detention in "segregation" as a result of his
subsequently overturned conviction for engaging in sexual acts
with a former inmate.
2. Denial of parole as a result of the improper conviction.
3. Denial of a parole rehearing after the institutional
violation was expunged from his record.
Plaintiff seeks immediate release on parole or a rehearing
on his parole eligibility, and damages of $10,000.00 from each
defendant. We ...