Gayot v. Wyoming County, 6:21-cv-06689

Plaintiff Andrew Gayot, an incarcerated individual, filed a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging excessive force and failure to intervene by correctional officers at Five Points Correctional Facility.
The main incident occurred on July 28, 2021, when Plaintiff was allegedly assaulted by officers during and after a cell extraction, following a dispute related to his mental health status.
Plaintiff claims he was denied proper medical care and alleges a pattern of misconduct, including a previous sexual assault and racial harassment (though the motion focuses on the July 2021 incident).
Plaintiff asserts that he submitted grievances about the July 2021 incident through facility mail, but that grievances sometimes "magically disappear."
Defendants moved for summary judgment solely on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies, presenting grievance records as evidence.
The Court found that Defendants failed to properly authenticate the grievance records and that Plaintiff’s claim of attempted exhaustion raised a genuine issue of material fact.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Failure to exhaust administrative remedies	Gayot claimed he filed a grievance, but process was unavailable due to lost/missing grievances	Defendants argue Plaintiff did not exhaust grievance process	Defendants failed to establish non-exhaustion; summary judgment denied
Admissibility of grievance records	N/A (Plaintiff did not contest records directly)	Defendants submitted records without proper authentication	Court held records inadmissible; not properly authenticated
Reliance on Attorney Declaration	N/A	Defendants relied on declaration for summary judgment evidence	Court held attorney's declaration was not admissible evidence
Plaintiff’s deposition as evidence	Deposition supports claim he attempted to exhaust	Defendants argue deposition shows failure to exhaust	Deposition creates factual dispute; does not warrant summary judgment

Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (summary judgment standard—no rational jury could find for non-moving party)
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (summary judgment burden and standards)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (genuine issue of material fact standard)
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (how the burden shifts on summary judgment)
Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (deliberate indifference in failure to protect claims)
Annis v. Cnty. of Westchester, 136 F.3d 239 (elements of Section 1983 claim)
Sykes v. James, 13 F.3d 515 (scope of rights under Section 1983)
Patterson v. Cnty. of Oneida, 375 F.3d 206 (requirement of personal involvement in Section 1983)