Alvarez v. Akwitti, 997 F.3d 211

Joaquin Alvarez, a Texas state prisoner at the Hughes Unit, alleged a fellow inmate (a "sexually violent predator") threatened him and sent threatening letters. Alvarez requested a transfer for safety.
Guards required Alvarez to identify the alleged predator publicly, which allegedly gave Alvarez a reputation as a "snitch." Alvarez named witnesses and provided letters to the prison committee.
A transfer-committee hearing chaired by assistant warden Chimdi A. Akwitti denied Alvarez’s transfer request; Alvarez alleges Akwitti called him a "snitch" during the hearing and refused the transfer for that reason.
About a month later, the same inmate assaulted Alvarez, saying Alvarez ‘‘never should have reported him.’’ Alvarez sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference and sought damages and injunctive relief.
The district court sua sponte dismissed the in forma pauperis complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim, without addressing Alvarez’s allegations that Akwitti had outed him as a snitch and denied transfer for that reason.
The Fifth Circuit vacated and remanded: it affirmed dismissal of official-capacity damages claims as barred by the Eleventh Amendment but held the district court must consider Alvarez’s personal-capacity Eighth Amendment allegations (and any response by Akwitti) in the first instance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Eleventh Amendment bars money damages against Akwitti in official capacity	Alvarez sought damages; official-capacity suit should permit relief	Eleventh Amendment bars § 1983 money damages against state officials in their official capacity	Dismissal affirmed as to official-capacity money damages (Eleventh Amendment bar)
Whether Alvarez stated an Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claim against Akwitti in his personal capacity	Alvarez alleges guards outed him as a "snitch," Akwitti called him a "snitch," denied transfer despite obvious risk, and inmate later attacked him	District court dismissed for failure to state a claim without addressing these specific allegations; implicit defense is lack of adequate pleading/knowledge by Akwitti	Vacated and remanded so the district court can consider Alvarez’s deliberate-indifference allegations and any response from Akwitti; no merits decision made

Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (U.S. 1994) (deliberate-indifference standard for prison officials to protect inmates)
Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337 (U.S. 1981) (Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishments; background on prison conditions)
Rogers v. Boatright, 709 F.3d 403 (5th Cir. 2013) (two-part deliberate-indifference inquiry: awareness of risk and actual drawing of inference)
Adames v. Perez, 331 F.3d 508 (5th Cir. 2003) (failure-to-protect claims require showing officials knew gang or others were aware of inmate’s informant status)
Longoria v. Texas, 473 F.3d 586 (5th Cir. 2006) (prison officials have a constitutional duty to protect inmates from inmate-on-inmate violence)
Oliver v. Scott, 276 F.3d 736 (5th Cir. 2002) (Eleventh Amendment bars § 1983 money damages against Texas Department of Criminal Justice officers in official capacity)
Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (U.S. 1972) (pro se complaints must be liberally construed)