Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants-prison officials’ motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action, alleging that plaintiff-prisoner’s due process and 8th Amendment rights were violated, when defendants improperly designated plaintiff as individual on extended supervised release status (as opposed to parolee status), where said misclassification subjected plaintiff to 90-day confinement without prior hearing due to his violation of term of parole. While plaintiff’s actual status as parolee would not have subjected him to instant 90-day confinement sanction, but would have subjected him to some other punishment, plaintiff could not prevail in his lawsuit, where three of four defendants were unaware of plaintiff’s true parolee status, or that plaintiff had been misclassified, so as to establish required finding that said defendants acted with deliberate indifference, as opposed to mere negligence. As to fourth defendant, while plaintiff presented evidence that his attorney had notified said defendant that plaintiff had been misclassified, said defendant was not decision-maker with respect to plaintiff’s confinement and had not played any role in imposition of instant extended supervision sanction.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Prisoners