Buchanan v. JumpStart S. C.
| Decision Date | 14 February 2022 |
| Docket Number | C/A 21-385-DCN-SVH |
| Parties | Stewart R. Buchanan, also known as Daphne Renee' Stewart, Plaintiff, v. JumpStart South Carolina; Michael Scharff, Chairman, Bd. Of Dir., JumpStart South Carolina; Daniel Sulton, Vice-Chairman, Bd. Of Dir., JumpStart South Carolina; Bob Caldwell; Sharon McDowell; Chris Phillips; Chuck Fields; Tommy Holt; Mike Kiriakides; Chris Urban; Tommy Moore; Carey Sanders; David Johnson; NFN Beard; Bryan Stirling; Larry Epps; Charles Williams; and Willie Davis, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina |
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER
Stewart R. Buchanan, also known as Daphne Renee' Stewart (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this suit on February 5, 2021, against JumpStart South Carolina (“JumpStart”) and multiple members of that organization, in their individual and official capacities, including Michael Scharff, a member of the JumpStart Board of Directors (collectively “JumpStart Defendants”).[1] Plaintiff additionally brings suit against the following employees of the South Carolina Department of Corrections (“SCDC”): Bryan Stirling (“Stirling”), SCDC Director; Larry Epps (“Epps”), the SCDC senior chaplain at Perry Correctional Institution (“PCI”); PCI warden Charles Williams; and Willie Davis. Plaintiff asserts claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 and § 1986 for conspiracy to violate his civil rights.[2]Plaintiff also asserts claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”); the Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. (“Fair Housing Act”); and South Carolina statutory and constitutional law. [ECF No. 1 at 4 6, ECF No. 1-1 at 13-16]. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief and monetary damages.
This matter comes before the court on the JumpStart Defendants' motion to dismiss. [ECF No. 21]. Pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975) the court advised Plaintiff of the dismissal procedures and the possible consequences if he failed to respond adequately to the motion. [ECF No. 23]. Also pending before the court is Plaintiff's motion for default judgment as to the JumpStart Defendants in their individual capacities. [ECF No. 29]. The motions having been fully briefed [see ECF Nos. 33, 34, 38, 40, 41], they are ripe for disposition.[3]
Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and Local Civ. Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d) (D.S.C.), the case has been assigned to the undersigned for all pretrial proceedings. Having carefully considered the parties' submissions and the record in this case, the undersigned recommends the district judge deny JumpStart Defendants' motion to dismiss and Plaintiff's motion for default judgment.
Plaintiff is an inmate housed at PCI. [ECF No. 1-1 ¶ 9]. Plaintiff alleges in a verified complaint that, at PCI, Stirling and select JumpStart Defendants were involved in the creation and maintenance of a “joint program using state resources to offer inmates state-assisted employment opportunities and state-assisted low rent housing opportunities as a re-entry plan for the inmates' release.” Id. ¶ 29.
In support, Plaintiff has submitted a memorandum of understanding providing the following:
[ECF No. 40-2 at 1-2].[4] Plaintiff alleges that to participate in the JumpStart program at PCI, an inmate must pass “a rigorous, forty (40) week, Christian religious character litmus test called the ‘JumpStart Re-Entry Assessments'” or “Cohorts, ” the tenets of which were “developed and published” by JumpStart Defendants and were “approved and established” by Stirling and Epps. [ECF No. 1-1 ¶¶ 29-30, 32]. Plaintiff describes these tenets as “five (5) groupings of Christian theology, ” “(1) CONNECT: You were formed for God's family, (2) GROW: You were created to become like Christ, (3) SERVE: You were shaped for serving God, (4) SHARE: You were made for a mission, (5) WORSHIP: You were planned for God's pleasure.” Id. ¶ 30. Plaintiff alleges these groupings and associated attributes are applied and scored “to assess an inmate's suitability to receive state-assisted re-entry assistance, ” resulting in “screening out inmates to not receive these state benefits whose Christianity is not of a certain type.” Id.
On January 24, 2019 [sic], Epps approved Plaintiff to participate in the Perry Cohort #8. Id. ¶ 34. On October 24, 2018, Epps decided, based on Plaintiff's scores on the JumpStart Re-Entry Assessments, Plaintiff would graduate at the very top of the class, one of only two such graduates from the past two years involving more than 200 inmates. Id. Immediately thereafter, Epps employed Plaintiff as a “coach” for Perry Cohort #9. Id.
One of the JumpStart Defendants, David Johnson (“Johnson”), an inside coordinator for JumpStart, appeared before the South Carolina Parole Board on November 13, 2018, to represent Epps's decision that, if paroled, Plaintiff would be guaranteed employment and housing by JumpStart. Id. ¶¶ 22, 35. Plaintiff was denied parole. Id. ¶ 35.
Plaintiff alleges his job performance continued to exceed minimum requirements and his personal ministry expanded to providing Sunday School and visitation for PCI's handicapped in the assisted living unit until Epps learned that Plaintiff lived openly as transgendered between 2004 and 2008. Id. ¶ 36. Epps then banned Plaintiff from using the PCI chaplaincy offices and equipment for his regular prison job as recreation liaison. Id.
On February 24, 2019, Plaintiff filed an American with Disabilities (“ADA”) discrimination complaint against Epps that was answered by an ADA legal advisor on February 25, 2019, stating, in part, as follows:
Discrimination against any individual is wrong, however, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 addresses the issue of sex discrimination not the ADA .... Nevertheless, I brought your concerns to the attention of the Chief of Pastoral Services.
Plaintiff alleges that on February 25, 2019, associate warden Susan Duffy advised “Epps of his potential liability and recommended he speak with Plaintiff.” Id. ¶ 38. Later that same day, Plaintiff was in Epps's office when SCDC chief chaplain Michael Brown telephoned to advise Epps that Plaintiff had filed a civil rights complaint against him. Id. ¶ 39.
On March 13, 2019, Epps met with Johnson and an additional JumpStart Defendant, NFN Beard (“Beard”), an unpaid employee of JumpStart, to discuss Plaintiff's transgender status and complaint. Id. ¶¶ 23, 40. Plaintiff alleges they agreed to terminate him from Perry Cohort #9 employment and “constructively deny him employment and housing opportunities with JumpStart . . . though Plaintiff's job performance and public deportment remained superior.” Id. ¶ 40.
At 2:00 p.m. on March 13, 2019, Johnson and Beard summoned Plaintiff to the PCI chaplaincy office, and the following interaction occurred:
Id. ¶ 41. Plaintiff alleges he was thus discharged from Perry Cohort #9 employment and constructively denied state-assisted employment and state-assisted housing...
To continue reading
Request your trial