United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
DAVID J. KENNEDY, Plaintiff,
ANTHONY H. STEWART, KEVIN LINDSEY, LT. CURTIS, AND JOHN DOE, Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL
F. COX, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
J. Kennedy, confined at the G. Robert Cotton Correctional
Facility in Jackson, Michigan, has filed a pro se civil
rights complaint. For the reasons stated below, the Court
will dismiss Plaintiff's claims against Defendants
Stewart, Lindsey, and Doe. The case may proceed against
Defendant Curtis on Plaintiff's First Amendment
Standard of Review
the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110
Stat. 1321 (1996) (PLRA), the Court is required to dismiss
any prisoner action brought under federal law if the
complaint is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief
from a defendant immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A; 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c).
The Court must read Plaintiff's pro se complaint
indulgently, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520
(1972), and accept Plaintiff's allegations as true unless
they are clearly irrational or wholly incredible. Denton
v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992).
asserts that he was elected as a Housing Unit
Representative/Warden Forum Member at his facility, and he
served on the Food Service Committee. As part of his
participation on that committee, Plaintiff asserts that he
regularly complained to the facility's administration
regarding the quality of food services.
asserts that on August 29, 2017, Defendant Curtis informed
him that he had “pissed him off” with his
complaints, and that “[i]f you keep making trouble then
I'm going to show you're touchable and make trouble
for you.” Dkt. 1, ¶ 18.
August 30, Plaintiff again complained about the food service
at a Warden Forum's meeting, and the following day
Plaintiff was placed in cuffs and told by a corrections
officer, “you must have really pissed Lt. Curtis off.
He has it out for you about your activities on the
Forum.” ¶ 21. Plaintiff was then placed in
administrative segregation. Plaintiff claims that on
September 1, he learned that Curtis had filed a false
misconduct ticket, charging him with threatening another
prisoner. Plaintiff claims he was told by another officer
that it was the result of “pissing off” Lt.
states that on September 2, he complained to Defendant
Stewart and Lindsey, the Warden and Deputy Warden of the
facility, about the false misconduct charge, but they did not
respond to his kites.
further claims that his administrative segregation cell's
window would not open, and that the “chuckhole”
was kept closed which caused poor ventilation. He also states
that the staff would not allow him to go outside for exercise
or fresh air. Plaintiff asserts that Defendants Mask and Doe
were responsible for the conditions of his cell. He claims
the poor air in his cell impaired his lung function, as he
suffers from sarcoidosis. Plaintiff filed a grievance
regarding the condition of his cell.
misconduct hearing was held on the report filed by Defendant
Curtis on September 13. Because staff were unable or
unwilling to produce the prisoner who was said to have
overheard Plaintiff's threat to another prisoner, the
hearing officer dismissed the misconduct charge. Plaintiff
was released from administrative segregation on that date.
claims that Defendant Curtis violated his First Amendment
rights by retaliating against him by filing a false
misconduct charge as a result of his complaints during the
Warden's Forum. He asserts that Defendants Stewart and
Lindsey violated his constitutional rights by failing to
respond to his kites about the conditions of his cell.
Finally, he asserts that Defendants Mask and Doe violated his
Eighth Amendment rights due to the poor ventilation in his
administrative segregation cell.