Moss v. Walters, 3:11-cv-00091

Moss, an inmate at Shawnee Correctional Center, sues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging Eighth Amendment violations from gas exposure at Lawrence Correctional Center during a July 29, 2010 incident.
During a nighttime lockdown, the prison Tactical Team fired riot-control ordnance outside the building; there was no disturbance inside the cell house.
Moss reported a noxious odor, gagging, retching, and temporary breathing difficulty after the explosions, later moved to the chow hall.
A shift in wind allegedly caused OC gas from a training exercise to enter the housing unit; Moss and others were exposed with claims of life-threatening exposure.
Plaintiff attaches exhibits stating the substance was OC gas; he seeks compensatory/punitive damages and declaratory and injunctive relief.
The court sua sponte dismisses the complaint under §1915A, holding no Eighth Amendment violation and noting Moss’s prior strikes under 28 U.S.C. §1915(g); dismissal is with prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does Moss state an Eighth Amendment confinement claim?	Moss suffered life-threatening OC gas exposure during a training exercise.	Exposure was incidental to a training exercise; no assault or deliberate harm occurred.	No, claim fails; no durable deprivation or deliberate indifference shown.
Was there deliberate indifference by prison officials?	Defendants knew of substantial risk and caused or permitted exposure.	No knowledge of intent to harm; exposure was inadvertent and mitigated.	No; conduct did not show deliberate indifference.
Did OC gas exposure during a training exercise constitute a constitutional violation?	Gas exposure was a cruel and sadistic experiment conflicting with humane conditions.	OC gas exposure in a controlled exercise with no force or intent to harm does not violate the Eighth Amendment.	No; not a constitutional violation given lack of force, intent, and temporary nature.

Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994) (deliberate indifference standard for Eighth Amendment risk of harm)
Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294 (1991) (requires both objective conditions and subjective deliberate indifference)
Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337 (1981) (analysis of deprivation of basic human needs in prison conditions cases)
Soto v. Dickey, 744 F.2d 1260 (7th Cir. 1984) (reasonable use of chemical agents depends on circumstances; no violation under proper use)
Sallenger v. Oakes, 473 F.3d 731 (7th Cir. 2007) (OC exposure context and bystander considerations in gas deployments)
Harper v. Albert, 400 F.3d 1052 (7th Cir. 2005) (gross negligence not sufficient for §1983; deliberate indifference required)