Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

BODDIE v. COUGHLIN

March 27, 1984

LLOYD E. BODDIE, JR., Plaintiff, against THOMAS A. COUGHLIN, III, CHARLES SCULLY, and OFFICER H. ROSARIO, Defendants.


The opinion of the court was delivered by: DUFFY

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

KEVIN THOMAS DUFFY, D.J.:

 Lloyd E. Boddie, Jr., brought this pro se section 1983 action against Thomas A. Coughlin, III, Commissioner of Correctional Services for New York State, Charles Scully, Superintendent of Green Haven Correctional Facility ("Green Haven"), and Green Haven Correctional Officer Harry Rosario. Boddie alleges, inter alia, harassment, excessive punishment of confinement in a Special Housing Unit, and other various alleged denials of his constitutional rights. By Memorandum and Order dated July 22, 1982, I denied defendants' motion to dismiss Boddie's complaint and directed defendants to submit information concerning Green Haven's internal administrative grievance procedures. By a subsequent Memorandum and Order dated August 25, 1982, I found taht Green Haven's Inmate Grievance Resolution Committee ("IGRC") comported with the minimum standards enumerated in 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a)(2). Accordingly, Boddie was order to exhaust his available administrative remedies.

 In accordance with this Order, Boddie filed four separate grievances in September 1982. None of these grievances concerned matters contained in his section 1983 complaint. Soon therefore Green Haven and Boddie were able to resolve informally all four grievances. Nevertheless, plaintiff sought a preliminary injunction on October 6, 1982. Before this injunctive request was entirely resolved, defendants made the instant motion for summary judgment. In support, defendants submit extensive affidavits of the individuals involved. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. Examining plaintiff's claim in the light most favorable to him, but in view of the extensive and uncontroverted affidavits provided by defendants, I find defendants entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Accordingly, for the reasons that follow plaintiff's complaint is dismissed.

 FACTS

 Plaintiff cites eight instances of allegedly unconstitutional conduct by the defendants. A short summary of these allegations is as follows:

 (1) That on November 16, 1981, his request to attend his brother's funeral was improperly denied;

 (2) That on November 16, 1981, in the J School Corridor, Rosario improperly instigated an altercation with plaintiff, and improperly filed a Misbehavior Report against plaintiff;

 (3) That on November 16, 1981, upon his admission to the Special Housing Unit ("SHU"), plaintiff was ordered to disrobe and was examined by a female nurse in violation of the tenets of his Muslim faith;

 (4) That the penalty imposed at the close of the Superintendent's Proceeding, held November 24 and 27, 1981, based on the incident in the J School Corridor, was excessive;

 (5) That the plaintiff improperly was made to wait approximately twenty days to see the psychiatrist, although he had complained of depression and sleeplessness as a result of his brother's death;

 (6) That the toilet in plaintiff's cell in SHU was not repaired though he had complained that it leaked water onto the cell floor when flushed;

 (7) That because of shortages and delays in laundry service, plaintiff was able to change his underwear only twice in sixty day; and

 (8) That the plaintiff had difficulty in getting denture adhesive either from the Commissary or the Infirmary and that when denture adhesive was ultimately procured, plaintiff was not ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.