Glenn C. Smith v. Florida Department of Corrections
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 7193
| 11th Cir. | 2013Background
- Smith, a Florida state prisoner, was transferred from MCI to OCI in March 2003 allegedly for population adjustment after filing a state court appeal and a FDOC lawsuit.
- Smith alleges FDOC retaliatory transfers in retaliation for exercising First Amendment rights and seeks relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- The district court granted summary judgment; on appeal, the panel reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
- Discovery issues plagued the case: Smith could not obtain his deposition transcript and FDOC limited inmate communications during discovery.
- In resolving on remand, the court finds genuine fact questions about the transfer motivation, potential widespread practice, and whether counsel should be appointed.
- The court reverses and remands to permit additional discovery and appoint counsel for Smith.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether summary judgment was proper given discovery impediments | Smith contends discovery was incomplete and essential facts remained unresolved | FDOC asserts adequate evidence shows non-retaliatory transfer reasons and limits on discovery were appropriate | Summary judgment improper; remand for further discovery |
| Whether there is a material question about the transfer’s motive | Affidavits from inmates suggest a wide-scale retaliatory practice | FDOC asserts population adjustment as neutral rationale; no direct knowledge of Smith | Questions of fact remain as to motive and whether Smith’s transfers were retaliatory |
| Whether the district court abused its discretion in not appointing counsel | Exceptional circumstances and complexity warrant counsel; Smith faced impediments in discovery | Appointment of counsel required on remand | |
| Whether amendment of the complaint should be allowed on remand | Amendment may be proper if new counsel determines it | Not decided; may be acted upon if counsel determines amendment is proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment burden and movant's duties)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (evidence standards for summary judgment)
- Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574 (1998) (threshold issues; entitlement to discovery if viable claim exists)
- Ulmer v. Chancellor, 691 F.2d 209 (5th Cir. 1982) (Ulmer factors for exceptional circumstances in appointing counsel)
- Depew v. City of St. Marys, Ga., 787 F.2d 1496 (11th Cir. 1986) (to establish policy or custom, need persistent, widespread practice)
- Fowler v. Jones, 899 F.2d 1088 (11th Cir. 1990) (exceptional circumstances; consideration of appointment of counsel)
- Dean v. Barber, 951 F.2d 1210 (11th Cir. 1992) (counsel appointment in exceptional circumstances)