PRITT v. DOE 1 et al
| STEVEN W. PRITT |
| JOHN DOE 1, JOHN DOE 2, JOHN DOE 3, MARION COUNTY JAIL ONE, MARION COUNTY SHERIFF and MEDICAL STAFF JANE DOES 1,2,3,4 |
| 1:2016cv03125 |
| November 15, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Denise K. LaRue |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
101
ENTRY GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - Plaintiff Steven Pritt is currently incarcerated at the New Castle Correctional Facility (New Castle). He filed a civil ri ghts complaint alleging he was subjected to excessive force by defendant Deputy Brandau while being escorted to medical at the Marion County Jail. The Court screened his complaint and determined that Mr. Pritt adequately stated an excessive force claim pursuant to the Fourth Amendment against Deputy Brandau. Dkt. 23 . Presently pending before the Court are the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and the defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment. For the foregoing reasons , the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, dkt. 74 , is granted and the defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment, dkt. 86 , is denied. Because this Entry resolves the question of liability, this matter will now proceed to reso lve the question of damages. Accordingly, no judgment shall issue at this time. The clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect that the defendant's last name is correctly spelled "Brandau." (See Order). Copy to plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 11/13/2018. (APD)
|
|
Filing
52
Entry Discussing Cross Motions for Summary Judgment on Exhaustion - Plaintiff Steven Pritt, who at all relevant times was incarcerated at the Marion County Jail ("MCJ"), brought this civil rights action pro se pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 7; 1983 against defendant Deputy Brandou. Mr. Pritt alleges that Deputy Brandou assaulted him on July 14, 2016, without cause during his short stay at MCJ. Deputy Brandou raised the affirmative defense that Mr. Pritt failed to exhaust his admi nistrative remedies regarding this claim before bringing this action as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"). In response, Mr. Pritt filed a "dispositive motion" arguing that he exhausted his administrative r emedies, which the Court construed as a motion for summary judgment. Deputy Brandou filed a cross motion for summary judgment. Mr. Pritt has responded, and Deputy Brandou has replied. For the reasons explained in this Entry, the undisputed evid ence shows that MCJ's grievance process was not available to Mr. Pritt, and thus Deputy Brandou's exhaustion defense must be rejected. For the reasons explained above, Deputy Brandou's motion for summary judgment, dkt. 38 , is de nied, and Mr. Pritt's motion for summary judgment, dkt. 36 , is granted. Given the lack of disputed facts, there is no basis to hold a Pavey hearing on the exhaustion defense, and Deputy Brandou's exhaustion defense is rejected. This ac tion shall proceed to the merits of Mr. Pritt's excessive force claim against Deputy Brandou. Although Mr. Pritt's exhaustion submissions discuss the merits of other claims, such as a First Amendment claim, pursuant to the Court's Screening Entry, only an excessive force claim is proceeding in this action. A scheduling order shall issue by separate entry. (See Order). Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/25/2017. (APD)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
