Thornsberry v. Barden, 072021 FED8, 21-2029

Docket Nº21-2029
Opinion JudgePER CURIAM.
Party NameChristopher Thornsberry Plaintiff-Appellant v. Roosevelt Barden, Captain, East Arkansas Regional Unit; Fidel Cobb, Lieutenant, East Arkansas Regional Unit; Terrie L. Banister, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Arkansas Department of Correction; Justine M. Minor, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Arkansas Department of Correction; Stephen Lane, Captain,...
Judge PanelBefore LOKEN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Case DateJuly 20, 2021
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals, United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)

Christopher Thornsberry Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

Roosevelt Barden, Captain, East Arkansas Regional Unit; Fidel Cobb, Lieutenant, East Arkansas Regional Unit; Terrie L. Banister, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Arkansas Department of Correction; Justine M. Minor, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Arkansas Department of Correction; Stephen Lane, Captain, East Arkansas Regional Unit; Anthony Jackson, Deputy Warden, East Arkansas Regional Unit; Gaylon Lay, Warden, East Arkansas Regional Unit; Dexter Payne, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction; Judy Taylor, PREA Coordinator, Arkansas Department of Correction Defendants-Appellees

No. 21-2029

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

July 20, 2021

Unpublished

Submitted: June 29, 2021

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Delta

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Christopher Thornsberry appeals the district court's preservice dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Thornsberry's amended complaint was based on an incident in which he received a disciplinary violation after reporting that he was sexually harassed by another inmate. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand the case for further proceedings.

We conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing most of Thornsberry's claims. See Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (holding that dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to state a claim is reviewed de novo). Specifically, his allegation that Captain Roosevelt Barden made derogatory remarks was insufficient to state a claim. See Kurtz v. Shrewsbury, 245 F.3d 753, 759 (8th Cir. 2001) (holding that verbal harassment is actionable only if it is so brutal and wanton that it shocks the conscience). Thornsberry's assignment to isolation, loss of privileges, and reclassification were insufficient to state a due process claim, see Portley-El v. Brill, 288 F.3d 1063, 1065 (8th Cir. 2002) (holding that an inmate who makes a due process challenge to segregated confinement must show that the confinement imposed an atypical and significant hardship); Smith v. McKinney, 954 F.3d 1075, 1082 (8th Cir. 2020) (holding that there is no atypical and significant hardship when an inmate is demoted to segregation or deprived of commissary, phone, and visitation privileges); see also Persechini v. Callaway, ...

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