Tiberius Mays v. Jerome Springborn
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 11762
7th Cir.2013Background
- Plaintiff, a former Stateville inmate, filed a 2001 § 1983 suit against prison officials alleging Eighth and First Amendment violations from strip searches and retaliation for grievances.
- Plaintiff claimed improper, humiliating group strip searches, performed with dirty gloves in a freezing basement and coupled with demeaning comments.
- District court granted judgment as a matter of law for defendants; this court reversed and remanded this case previously.
- Case proceeded to trial; jury returned a verdict for defendants, prompting a renewed appeal focusing on jury instructions and special interrogatories.
- Appellant argues the jury instructions improperly shifted or misapplied the causation/burden standards for retaliation claims under First Amendment standards.
- The panel concludes plain-error review applies because defense counsel objected? (not objected at trial) and reverses for a new trial with corrected instructions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burden-shifting in retaliation instruction | Mays contends retaliation must be shown as a motivating factor by the plaintiff. | State contends Gross/Fairley control causation and require showing non-necessity of motive. | Plain error; instruction reversed for new trial. |
| Interrogatories misled on sole motivating factor | Interrogatories incorrectly asked if retaliation was the sole factor. | State asserts single-factor requirement is proper. | Plain error; four interrogatories improper. |
| Causation standard in First Amendment retaliation | Plaintiff need only show retaliation as a motivating factor. | Defendants could prevail if evidence showed actions would occur anyway. | Greene governs; burden should shift to defendants after plaintiff shows motivation. |
| Definition of burden-shifting under Mt. Healthy in this context | Retaliation must be shown as motivating factor; burden on defendants to prove would have occurred otherwise. | Gross applies the same; causation requires not being necessary condition by bad motive. | Court adopts Greene/Mt. Healthy standard; instruct correctly. |
Key Cases Cited
- Calhoun v. DeTella, 319 F.3d 936 (7th Cir. 2003) (Eighth Amendment strip-search protections)
- Dobbey v. Illinois Department of Corrections, 574 F.3d 443 (7th Cir. 2009) (First Amendment retaliation in prison procedures)
- Mays v. Springborn, 575 F.3d 643 (7th Cir. 2009) (retaliation standard for prisoners’ First Amendment claims)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (plain-error review standard)
- Lewis v. City of Chicago Police Dep’t, 590 F.3d 427 (7th Cir. 2009) (plain-error review and standard application)
- Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., 557 U.S. 167 (2009) (causation burden in mixed-motive context)
- Fairley v. Andrews, 578 F.3d 518 (7th Cir. 2009) (Gross framework; First Amendment context distinct)
- Greene v. Doruff, 660 F.3d 975 (7th Cir. 2011) (Mt. Healthy causation standard governs First Amendment cases)
- Mt. Healthy Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (1977) (burden-shifting causation framework)
- Spiegla v. Hull, 371 F.3d 928 (7th Cir. 2004) (burden and causation principles in Seventh Circuit)
- United States v. Driver, 242 F.3d 767 (7th Cir. 2001) (plain-error review principles)