Glenn C. Smith v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, 696 F. App'x 944

Background

Glenn C. Smith, a Florida prisoner serving life sentences, sued the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming a 2003 transfer from Martin CI to Okeechobee CI was retaliatory for his filing of lawsuits/grievances.
Smith had an extensive litigation history in prison; he filed dozens of suits and hundreds of grievances during incarceration, and conceded his primary evidence of retaliation was temporal proximity (lawsuit filed Feb 26, 2003; transfer notice Mar 18, 2003).
The FDOC presented testimony that the March 2003 transfer was a population-adjustment transfer implemented by population-management personnel who did not know of Smith’s litigation activity.
At bench trial Smith presented his testimony plus testimony from other inmates alleging retaliatory transfers; FDOC witnesses testified to neutral, non-retaliatory transfer procedures and specific population-adjustment planning.
The district judge ruled for FDOC, finding Smith failed to prove he personally suffered a retaliatory transfer (temporal proximity alone was insufficient) and therefore evidence of FDOC custom/practice was irrelevant; judge also awarded costs to FDOC and denied intervention motions by other inmates.
On appeal the Eleventh Circuit affirmed in part and dismissed in part: it declined to dismiss the appeal for lack of trial transcript (but held several issues could not be reviewed without the transcript), affirmed the merits rulings, affirmed the costs award, and dismissed Smith’s challenge to denial of other inmates’ motions to intervene for lack of standing.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Failure to file trial transcript on appeal	Smith argued the appeal could proceed without the transcript because the district court issued a detailed memorandum order.	FDOC argued absence of transcript prevents meaningful review of evidentiary rulings and trial challenges.	Court declined to dismiss appeal but held five specific trial-evidence issues cannot be reviewed without the transcript, and affirmed where review was possible.
Relevance of evidence of FDOC custom/practice	Smith argued evidence of a pattern/custom of retaliatory transfers was relevant even if his individual transfer evidence was thin.	FDOC argued custom evidence is irrelevant absent proof Smith personally suffered a constitutional injury.	Affirmed: plaintiff must show personal injury/retaliatory transfer before evidence of customs becomes relevant.
Temporal proximity as proof of retaliation (burden-shifting)	Smith argued the close timing between his lawsuit and transfer was sufficient to shift burden to FDOC to show legitimate penological reason.	FDOC argued temporal proximity alone is insufficient, especially given Smith’s prolific litigation making temporal coincidence likely.	Affirmed: trial judge reasonably found temporal proximity alone insufficient to meet plaintiff’s burden; burden did not shift.
Award of costs & intervention motions	Smith argued costs award was improper (rate, state defendant incurring no costs, and indigence) and that the judge erred denying other inmates’ motions to intervene.	FDOC argued costs were recoverable and properly awarded; intervention motions were denied appropriately and raise others’ rights.	Costs award affirmed (district judge considered indigence and did not abuse discretion); Smith lacks standing to appeal denial of other inmates’ intervention (claim dismissed).

Key Cases Cited

Loren v. Sasser, 309 F.3d 1296 (11th Cir. 2002) (pro se appellants must provide trial transcripts to challenge evidentiary findings on appeal)
Abood v. Block, 752 F.2d 548 (11th Cir. 1985) (appellate dismissal where trial transcript absent and findings were not memorialized in writing)
Smith v. Florida Dep’t of Corr., 713 F.3d 1059 (11th Cir. 2013) (earlier appellate ruling in this case vacating summary judgment on causation and remanding for discovery)
Rooney v. Watson, 101 F.3d 1378 (11th Cir. 1996) (no need to inquire into municipal policy/custom where plaintiff lacks proof of constitutional injury)
Chapman v. AI Transp., 229 F.3d 1012 (11th Cir. 2000) (Rule 54(d) and discretion to consider non‑prevailing party’s indigence when awarding costs)
Fischer v. S/Y Neraida, 508 F.3d 586 (11th Cir. 2007) (bench-trial factual findings reviewed for clear error; substantial evidence standard applies)
Wolff v. Cash 4 Titles, 351 F.3d 1348 (11th Cir. 2003) (appellate standing requires the appellant to be aggrieved; may not appeal only to protect others’ rights)