Holleman v. Zatecky

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants-prison officials’ motion for summary judgment in plaintiff-prisoner’s section 1983 action, alleging that defendants violated his First Amendment rights by transferring him to different prison facility in retaliation for plaintiff have filed lawsuit and grievance regarding alleged poor conditions of prison and its lunches, as well as having provided statements to local newspaper about alleged poor medical care at prison. While plaintiff had engaged in protected speech, plaintiff failed to show that his transfer was motivated by fact that he had engaged in said speech, as opposed to substance of his complaints, where he presented no evidence that his difficulties with prison’s medical provider, as well as cold conditions and lunch program at prison could not be improved by transfer to different prison, as articulated by defendants. As such, plaintiff could not overcome significant deference owed to defendants’ non-retaliatory justification for instant transfer. Also, plaintiff failed to establish that transfer was adverse act, where: (1) plaintiff was transferred to same type of facility, (2) defendants did not transfer plaintiff into life-threatening situation; and (3) plaintiff could only establish minor differences in policies and conditions between both facilities.