Edwards v. Villmer et al

Filing 53

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Tom Baxley's motion to dismiss is GRANTED. (Doc. No. 36 ) An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately. Signed by District Judge Ronnie L. White on 2/14/17. (KXS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
LAWRENCE M. EDWARDS,
Plaintiff,
v.
TOM VILLMER, et al. ,
Defendants,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No . 4:16-CV-1077 RLW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant Tom Baxley' s motion to dismiss pursuant to
Rule 12(b)( 6) of the Federal Rules of Ci vii Procedure. The motion is granted.

Standard
In reviewing a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted, the Court must take all facts alleged in the complaint to be true and must construe the
pleadings in the light most favorable to plaintiff. Gregory v. Dillard's, 494 F.3d 694, 709 (8th
Cir. 2007). The Federal Rules do not require great precision in pleadings. Id. at 710. "The
simplified notice pleading standard under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) requires only a statement that
gives the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiffs claim is and the grounds upon which it
rests." Id. (quotations omitted). However, the factual allegations in the complaint must be more
than "labels and conclusions" or "a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action."

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); see Gregory, 494 F.3d at 710.

A

complaint must plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face ."

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570.

Background
Plaintiff brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He claims that Baxley, a Corrections
Case Manager II, falsified information in his Adult Internal Risk Assessment in order to
reclassify him as a violent offender. His exhibits show that the Assessment was modified after
defendant Wendy Dashner conducted an investigation and concluded that plaintiff had
threatened an inmate and harassed the inmate' s mother. He filed a grievance with regard to the
incident, claiming that the reclassification was retaliatory.
Baxley moves to dismiss on the basis that there are no allegations in the complaint
showing that he conducted the Assessment after plaintiff engaged in activity protected by the
First Amendment.

He further contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity and that the

official-capacity claims are barred by the Eleventh Amendment.
Discussion
To succeed on his § 1983 retaliation claim, plaintiff must prove that he engaged in
protected activity and that defendants, to retaliate for the protected activity, took adverse action
against him that would chill a person of ordinary firmness from engaging in that activity. See
Revels v. Vin cenz, 382 F.3d 870, 876 (8th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 860 (2005).

In this case, plaintiff did not allege that he filed a grievance or engaged in other protected
activity before Baxley conducted the Assessment. As a result, his allegations against Baxley fail
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Furthermore, defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. Qualified immunity protects
state actors from liability under § 1983 unless the plaintiff shows both that the official violated a
constitutional right and that the right was "' clearly established' at the time of defendant's alleged
misconduct." Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S . 223 , 232 (2009). In this case, plaintiff has failed to

2

show either the violation of a constitutional right or that he had a clearly established right not to
be classified as a violent offender. So, defendant is entitled to immunity.
Finally, the Court agrees that plaintiff's official-capacity claims are barred by sovereign
immunity. See Kentucky v. Graham , 473 U.S. 159, 165-66 (1985).
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Tom Baxley' s motion to dismiss is
GRANTED . (Doc. No. 36)

An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately.
Dated this $ . y of February, 2017.

ONNIE L. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3