Donald Parkell v. Christopher Senato, 704 F. App'x 122

Background

In 2014 Donald Parkell, who identifies as “Jewish/Wicca,” requested a kosher diet at James T. Vaughn Correctional Center after Chaplain Pennell approved his change of religion.
Food Services Admin. Senato demanded rabbinical verification that Parkell was an Orthodox Jew; Inmate Grievance Coordinator Dutton returned a grievance directing Parkell to Pennell.
Parkell submitted a Religious Diet Participation Agreement and later was placed on a kosher diet only after a DOC policy change in April 2016 allowing non-Jewish inmates a kosher diet if tied to a sincerely held belief.
Parkell sued under the First Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection, class-of-one), and RLUIPA seeking injunctive and monetary relief; he later voluntarily dismissed his injunctive claim after receiving kosher meals.
The district court granted summary judgment dismissing Dutton for lack of personal involvement, holding the RLUIPA claim moot, and awarding qualified immunity to Senato and Pennell on the First Amendment and equal-protection claims.
The Third Circuit affirmed dismissal of RLUIPA and the equal-protection claim, but vacated qualified immunity for Senato and Pennell on the First Amendment claim and remanded for further proceedings.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether RLUIPA claim remains justiciable after plaintiff received kosher diet and voluntarily dismissed injunctive relief	Parkell argued mootness exception (capable of repetition) applies because transfers create recurring delays	Defendants argued voluntary dismissal and provision of diet mooted injunctive relief; declaratory relief not available for past wrongs	RLUled: RLUIPA claim moot; voluntary dismissal and prospective nature of declaratory relief foreclose relief
Whether defendants violated First Amendment right to religious exercise by denying kosher diet	Parkell argued his sincerely held religious beliefs require kosher diet and denial violated his rights	Defendants argued belief system was novel/undefined, and denial based on policy limiting kosher diets to Orthodox Jews was reasonable	Held: District court assumed constitutional violation but erred granting qualified immunity; Third Circuit vacated qualified immunity and remanded because defendants judged orthodoxy instead of sincerity
Whether defendants entitled to qualified immunity on First Amendment claim	Parkell argued established law protects sincerely held religious dietary practices even if unorthodox	Defendants argued conduct was reasonable given novel facts and lack of controlling precedent	Held: Qualified immunity denied as to First Amendment claims—prison officials should have evaluated sincerity, not orthodoxy; remand for factual resolution
Whether equal-protection (class-of-one) claim was viable	Parkell asserted he was treated differently for lacking Jewish ancestry requirement	Defendants argued plaintiff failed to allege he was the lone victim of differential treatment	Held: Equal-protection class-of-one claim fails for failure to allege unique disparate treatment; court did not reach qualified immunity on that claim

Key Cases Cited

Giles v. Kearney, 571 F.3d 318 (3d Cir.) (summary judgment standard)
Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (qualified immunity framework)
Sharp v. Johnson, 669 F.3d 144 (3d Cir.) (RLUIPA remedies limited to equitable relief)
CMR D.N. Corp. v. City of Philadelphia, 703 F.3d 612 (3d Cir.) (declaratory relief is prospective)
Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (prison regulation review standard)
Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730 (officials can be on notice in novel facts)
Vinning-El v. Evans, 657 F.3d 591 (7th Cir.) (sincerity, not orthodoxy, controls religious-diet claims)
Renchenski v. Williams, 622 F.3d 315 (3d Cir.) (class-of-one pleading requirements)
DeHart v. Horn, 227 F.3d 47 (3d Cir.) (sincerely held religious belief test)
Knowles v. Pfister, 829 F.3d 516 (7th Cir.) (Wicca recognized as religion)
Edwards v. Shanley, 666 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir.) (summary judgment factual limits)
Rendell v. Rumsfeld, 484 F.3d 236 (3d Cir.) (capable of repetition exception narrow)