Bland v. Lassiter

Citation972 F.2d 338
Decision Date06 May 1992
Docket NumberNos. 91-6592,91-6593,s. 91-6592
PartiesNOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. William Thomas BLAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Linda Kay BLAND, Plaintiff, v. Fay LASSITER; Danny Thompson, Defendants-Appellees. Linda Kay BLAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, and William Thomas BLAND, Plaintiff, v. Fay LASSITER; Danny Thompson, Defendants-Appellees. . Argued:
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)

ARGUED: Amy Jabloner, Student Attorney, Appellate Advocacy Clinic, Washington College of Law, THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Sylvia Hargett Thibaut, Assistant Attorney General, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for appellees. ON BIREF: Jennifer Lyman, Appellate Advocacy Clinic, Washington College of Law, THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Lacy H. Thornburgh, Attorney General, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Before HALL and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and KELLAM, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Virginia, sitting by designation.

KELLAM, Senior District Judge:

OPINION

William Thomas Bland (husband) and Linda Kay Bland (wife) (nee Sutton), inmates of the North Carolina Department of Corrections, appeal from the District Court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, challenging the policy utilized by the Department of officially listing all inmates by the name of their original entry into the prison system. Wife earlier had entered the Department of Corrections under the name of Linda Sutton. Prior to her reentry in 1990, she had married William Thomas Bland. After she reentered the system, she was advised that pursuant to departmental policy she would be officially carried on their records as Linda Sutton and she should so notify her family and friends. Plaintiffs objected and asserted the record keeping violated their constitutional rights to marriage and privacy. Following appointment of counsel for plaintiffs and the filing of an amended complaint, defendants filed a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment. Finding no dispute of material fact, and finding that the departmental policy furthers penological interest, is reasonably related to legitimate prison objectives, allows the prison system to maintain effective records and maximize security, and that its purpose in no way relates to nor is intended to infringe upon an inmate's right to marriage, the District Court granted the motion for summary judgment. Our review of the record and the District Court opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Plaintiff can access prison services, mail, health care and grievance procedures by the simple use of the name Linda Sutton, now Linda Bland or a/k/a Linda Bland, or Linda Bland, formerly Linda Sutton. The mail room has been alerted to the fact Linda Sutton is a/k/a Linda Bland. Any claim for unreasonable delay or problem in the delivery of mail can thus be corrected. We therefore affirm on the reasoning of the District Court. Bland v. Lassiter, No. CA-90-123-CRT-D (E.D.N.C., April 30, 1991). Following argument in this case, appellant moved the Court for permission to correct the record before the Court by asserting additional facts, the correctness of which appellee challenges. Granting of said motion would not affect the decision and is therefore denied.

AFFIRMED

HALL, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part:

Linda Kay Bland wishes to be known by her legal (married) name, and her husband wishes to address his letters to her in this name. It is the name under which she was committed to prison on the sentence she is currently serving. We are not confronted with an alias, a name taken for religious reasons but which has not been changed legally, or even a name legally changed after admission to the prison. Yet the majority...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT