The Case: Cooper v. Schriro (8th Cir. 1999), The Court cites Sprouse v. Babcock, 870 F.2d 450, 452 (8thCir. 1989) (recognizing right to petition for redress of grievances under established prison grievance system);
and Hudspeth v. Figgins, 584 F.2d 1345, 1348 (4th Cir. 1978) (per curiam) (threat to prisoner may state claim of denial of access to courts if threats were intended to intimidate inmate from exercising that right), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 913 (1979).
However, the Court found that in this instance Cooper did not state a claim as to superintendent Michael Kemna based on his allegation that he "belie[ved]" Kemna ordered officers to file false violations against him in retaliation for his grievances. See Atkinson v. Bohn, 91 F.3d 1127, 1129 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (speculative and conclusory allegations cannot support retaliation claim).
Posts
