Hampton v. Baldwin et al

Filing 119

ORDER ADOPTING 117 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION and GRANTING in part and DENYING in part 36 Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies. Defendants Givens, Clark, Lanpley, and Jaimet are DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to correct Defendants' names on the docket as reflected in footnote 1. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 5/15/2019. (mlp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
DEON HAMPTON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JOHN BALDWIN, KEVIN KINK,
KAREN JAIMET, OFFICER BURLEY,
LT. GIVENS, OFFICER CLARK,
OFFICER LANPLEY, JOHN DOE 1-4,
JOHN VARGA, OFFICER GEE,
OFFICER MANZANO, OFFICER
BLACKBURN, LT. DOERING, and
SGT. KUNDE,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 3:18-CV-550-NJR-RJD

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ROSENSTENGEL, Chief Judge:
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 117), which recommends granting in part
and denying in part the Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Exhaustion of
Administrative Remedies filed by Defendants John Baldwin, Karen Jaimet, Kevin Kink,
Nicholas Lanpley, Michael Clark, Jeremy Givens, Jacob Blackburn, Christopher Doering,
Taylor Gee, Susan Kunde, Arthur Manzano, and John Varga (Doc. 36). 1
Plaintiff Deon Hampton, a transgender inmate, filed this lawsuit pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging Defendants violated her constitutional rights while she was

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to correct Defendants’ names on the docket as reflected in this
paragraph.

1

Page 1 of 4

incarcerated at various correctional centers within the Illinois Department of Corrections
(Doc. 1). Hampton is proceeding on her Amended Complaint, which alleges nine counts
related to Defendants’ alleged violation of the Equal Protection Clause, the Eighth
Amendment, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Illinois Hate Crimes Act, and
Illinois state law regarding intentional infliction of emotional distress (Doc. 64).
On April 20, 2018, all Defendants except Officer Burley filed a motion for summary
judgment asserting Hampton failed to exhaust her administrative remedies, as required
by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. §1997e, et seq., prior to filing this lawsuit
(Doc. 36). After supplemental briefing on the issue and an evidentiary hearing held by
Judge Daly pursuant to Pavey v. Conley, 544 F.3d 739 (7th Cir. 2008), Judge Daly entered
the Report and Recommendation that is currently before the Court. Objections to the
Report and Recommendation were due May 13, 2019. No objections were filed.
Because no party has filed an objection, the undersigned need not undertake a de
novo review. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Johnson v.
Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 741 (7th Cir. 1999). Instead, the Court should review the
Report and Recommendation for clear error. Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734,
739 (7th Cir. 1999). The Court may then “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
While de novo review is not required here, the Court has reviewed Judge Daly’s
Report and Recommendation for clear error. Following this review, the Court agrees with
her findings, analysis, and conclusions. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 117) and GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the Motion for
Page 2 of 4

Summary Judgment on the Issue of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies (Doc. 36).
The Court finds that Hampton failed to exhaust her administrative remedies as to
Count Three against Defendants Givens, Clark, and Lanpley, as well as Count Four
against Defendant Jaimet. Defendants Givens, Clark, Lanpley, and Jaimet are therefore
DISMISSED without prejudice. This case shall now proceed on the merits as to the
following claims:
Count One:

Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection claim against John
Baldwin, the Director of the IDOC, in his official capacity for refusing
to place Plaintiff in a women’s prison.

Count Two:

Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection claim against Director
Baldwin and Dixon Warden John Varga in their official capacities
related to Plaintiff’s subjection to continued verbal sexual
harassment due to her gender identity.

Count Three:

Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim against Defendants John
Does 1-4, Officer Burley, Officer Gee, IA Officer Manzano, and IA
Officer Blackburn in their individual capacities and Director
Baldwin and Warden Varga in their official capacities for failing to
ensure Plaintiff’s safety at Dixon and Lawrence despite their
knowledge that she is vulnerable to abuse and sexual assault.

Count Four:

Eighth Amendment cruel and unusual punishment claim against
Defendants Warden Varga and Warden Kink, in their individual
capacities, and Director Baldwin and Warden Varga in their official
capacities for placing Plaintiff in segregation, thereby exacerbating
her serious mental health problems.

Count Five:

Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Officer Burley, Lt.
Doering, and Sgt. Kunde.

Count Six:

Claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act against Director
Baldwin and Warden Varga in their official capacities for failing to
provide Plaintiff with reasonable accommodations for her Gender
Dysphoria disability.

Page 3 of 4

Count Seven:

Monell claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Director Baldwin and
Warden Varga in their official capacities for ratifying and
implementing unconstitutional policies related to transgender
prisoners.

Count Eight:

Claim under the Illinois Hate Crimes Act against Officer Burley in
his individual capacity for allegedly physically assaulting Plaintiff
due to her gender and sexual orientation, and against Director
Baldwin and Warden Varga in their official capacities to prevent the
continued violation of Plaintiff’s rights under the Illinois Hate
Crimes Act.

Count Nine:

Intentional infliction of emotional distress claim against Director
Baldwin, Warden Varga, Warden Kink, Lt. Doering, Sgt. Kunde, and
Officer Burley in their individual capacities.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: May 15, 2019
____________________________
NANCY J. ROSENSTENGEL
Chief U.S. District Judge

Page 4 of 4