United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
M. YANDLE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Rodney Love, an inmate in the custody of the Illinois
Department of Corrections (“IDOC”), brings this
lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his
constitutional rights were violated while he was incarcerated
at Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”).
Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that he was denied due
process when he was not allowed to call witnesses at a
disciplinary hearing held on November 27, 2013 (Doc. 7). He
proceeds on one count: Defendants Veath and Hart violated
Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment right to due process in
relation to the November 20, 2013 disciplinary report and
subsequent administrative proceedings (Doc. 7).
matter is currently before the Court on Defendants'
Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 68) and the Brief in
Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment,
construed by the Court as Plaintiff's Response to
Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc.
For the following reasons, Defendants' motion is
Rodney Love was an inmate at Menard on November 20, 2013
(Plaintiff's Deposition, Doc. 69-1 at 14). On that day,
an Incident Disciplinary Report was filed by Correctional
Officer Shel Stillwell-Davis, citing Love for two offenses
that occurred on the same Dated: 103. Bribery-Extortion; and
601. Aiding & Abetting, Attempt, Solicitation or
Conspiracy (Disciplinary Report, Doc. 7 at 15-16). Love was
provided a copy of the disciplinary ticket (Doc. 69-1 at 20).
He did not detach and return the witness request slip portion
of the Disciplinary Report (Id. at 25-26). Love
alleges that he mailed an envelope to the Adjustment
Committee on November 22, 2013, enclosing a request that his
cellmate, Seith Williams, be a witness at his hearing
November 27, 2013, the Adjustment Committee held a hearing
concerning the November 20, 2013 ticket (Id. at 27).
Love was questioned at the hearing, but no witnesses were
interviewed (Id. at 28). Love alleges that he
requested his witnesses be interviewed during the hearing
(Id.). However, the Adjustment Committee Report
notes, “No Witness Requested” (Adjustment
Committee Final Summary Report, Doc. 7 at 17). The Adjustment
Committee found Love guilty on both counts and disciplined
Love with one year C Grade, one year segregation, and one
year commissary restriction (Id.). Love served two
months in segregation at Menard (Doc. 69-1 at 39). He was
transferred to Pontiac Correctional Center
(“Pontiac”) in February 2014 where he remained in
segregation for nine months (Id.). Love served a
total of eleven months in segregation (Id. at 85).
asserts that the Pontiac Segregation Program in and of itself
rises to the level of an atypical and significant hardship,
thus triggering due process protections (Love's
Complaint, Doc. 7 at 6). Specifically, he complains about the
conditions at the prison such as excessive noise, excessive
light, inmates throwing feces and urine, unsanitary
conditions, verbally abusive inmates, limited interaction
with other prisoners, and limited interaction with visitors
his deposition, Love testified to the following. The showers
in segregation at Pontiac were not clean (Doc. 69-1 at 52)
although they are cleaned by the “farm worker
inmates” after everybody takes showers on the same day
(Id. at 57). Love was allowed showers two or three
times a week while in segregation at Pontiac (Id. at
53). He was provided an indigent bag of toiletry items,
including shampoo, soap, toothbrush and toothpaste
(Id. at 58). Love had shower shoes while at Pontiac
(Id. at 59).
was subjected to “verbal warfare” from other
inmates, shouting contests, and inmates banging on doors and
making noise all day (Id. at 59). The constant noise
and light kept him from sleeping (Id. at 59, 69-70).
He was aware of inmates getting tickets for creating
excessive noise (Id. at 63).
had access to laundry facilities to clean his clothing and
bedspread (Id. at 76). He was provided food three
times a day (Id. at 76-77) and had access to medical
care (Id. at 83). Love had one visit from his son
and visits from his mother once every month or two months
while at Pontiac (Id.). Love was allowed five visits
per month (Id. at 84).
was allowed yard privileges for two hours a day
(Id.). While in the yard, inmates were confined to
one-man cells (Id. at 45). The cells were larger
than the living cells and large enough to do exercises, such
as push-ups, air squats, and jumping jacks (Id. at
46). Love was able to communicate with other inmates while in
the cells in the yard (Id. at 47).
was hit with feces thrown by an inmate while in the yard
(Id. at 49). There were rules against urine throwing
and feces throwing (Id. at 48) and Love was aware of
inmates getting tickets for throwing feces (Id. at
63). Love had access to a television after his first month in
segregation at Pontiac (Id. at 85).
judgment is appropriate only if the moving party can
demonstrate “that there is no genuine dispute as to any
material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a); Celotex Corp.
v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322(1986); see also
Ruffin-Thompkins v. Experian Information Solutions,
Inc., 422 F.3d 603, 607 (7th Cir. 2005). The moving
party bears the initial burden of demonstrating the lack of
any genuine issue of material fact. Celotex, 477
U.S. at 323. Once a properly supported motion for summary
judgment is made, the ...