GAYLES v. STACY et al

Filing 17

Entry Discussing Recent Filings, Identifying Viable Claim and Directing Further Proceedings - granting 16 Motion to Amend/Correct to the extent that the amended complaint is understood to seek $1.4 million in punitive damages and $1.4 million in compensatory damages. No other viable federal or state law claims have been identified by the Court in Gayles' recent flurry of filings. Given these findings, the following steps shall be taken: 1. The clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect Chaplain Stacy as the sole defendant in this action. 2. The plaintiff shall have through April 29, 2014, in which to notify the Court of any disagreement with the Court's assessment that only the single viable claim iden tified above is present in this action. 3. The clerk is designated, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). 4. In filing an answer, Chaplain Stacy is only required to respond to the viable claim announced in this Entry. (See Entry.) Copies distributed pursuant to distribution list. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 4/9/2014. (RSF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION

KEVIN LEE GAYLES,
Plaintiff,
vs.
STACY, Chaplain,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:14-cv-26-JMS-WGH

Entry Discussing Recent Filings, Identifying Viable Claim
and Directing Further Proceedings
Plaintiff Kevin Lee Gayles, currently an inmate at the Putnamville Correctional Facility,
alleges that Chaplain Stacy and Chief Robinson violated his civil rights while he was confined at
the Marion County Jail. Gayles’ complaint was dismissed for the reasons explained in the Entry
of February 10, 2014. He was given a period of time in which to show cause why Judgment
should not issue. In response, Gayles filed eight documents including an amended complaint and
motion to amend and clarify. See dkts. 8-16. These filings are now considered by the Court.
First, the motion to amend [dkt. 16] is granted to the extent that the amended complaint
is understood to seek $1.4 million in punitive damages and $1.4 million in compensatory
damages.
Second, the amended complaint is a near duplication of the original complaint and fails to
correct the deficiencies noted in the Entry of February 10, 2014.1 However, contained within the

1

Specifically, the claim that Chief Robinson’s negligence resulted in Gayles’ inability to
complete the administrative remedies process in violation of his due process rights fails to state a claim

1

additional filings, specifically the amended notice of tort claim filed on March 4, 2014, [dkt. 10]
are additional factual allegations which could support a single viable claim for relief.
That claim is the following:
On January 6, 2013, plaintiff Kevin Lee Gayles, a black man, was incarcerated at the
Marion County Jail. On that day, Gayles and two other inmates left religious services in the
Chapel to use the restroom. Upon their return, Chaplain Stacy allowed the two white inmates to
re-enter the Chapel. Gayles, however, was denied re-entry and was sent to segregation and
charged with a disciplinary offense. Gayles was instructed not to attend any future religious
services or programs. These allegations, read liberally, are sufficient to state a Fourteenth
Amendment, equal protection claim against the Chaplain in his individual capacity. DeWalt v.
Carter, 224 F.3d 607, 620 n. 7 (7th Cir. 2000) (To state a Fourteenth Amendment claim plaintiff
must allege that the defendants purposefully discriminated against him because of his
identification with a particular group.).
No other viable federal or state law claims have been identified by the Court in Gayles’
recent flurry of filings. Given these findings, the following steps shall be taken:
1.

The clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect Chaplain Stacy as the sole
defendant in this action.

upon which relief may be granted and is dismissed for the reasons explained in the Entry of February 10,
2014. See also Antonelli v. Sheahan, 81 F.3d 1422, 1430-31 (7th Cir. 1996) (“any right to a grievance
procedure is a procedural right, not a substantive one. Accordingly, a state’s inmate grievance procedures
do not give rise to a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause.” Id. at 1430-31(internal citations
omitted)). As previously noted, however, Gayles allegations may be relevant if the defendant raises the
affirmative defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies. See Dole v. Chandler, 438 F.3d 804,
809 (7th Cir. 2006).

2

2.

The plaintiff shall have through April 29, 2014, in which to notify the Court of
any disagreement with the Court’s assessment that only the single viable claim
identified above is present in this action.

3.

The clerk is designated, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3), to issue and serve
process on the defendant in the manner specified by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(1).
Process shall consist of the amended complaint and March 4, 2014 filings [dkts.
10-15], applicable forms and this Entry.

4.

In filing an answer, Chaplain Stacy is only required to respond to the viable claim
announced in this Entry.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________________________

04/09/2014
Date: __________________

Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana

Distribution:
KEVIN LEE GAYLES
DOC 850892
PUTNAMVILLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Inmate Mail/Parcels
1946 West U.S. Hwy 40
Greencastle, IN 46135
Chaplain Stacy
730 E. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46202

3