Since the plaintiff requested damages and did not allege an official policy, his suit should be construed as an individual capacity suit and not an official capacity suit.
The allegation that a supervisor failed to investigate the incident after the fact did not establish his personal knowledge or acquiescence.
The failure of prison officials adequately to investigate the plaintiff's grievance as prescribed by their own procedures did not violate the Constitution.
At 497: "Sexual harassment of a prisoner by a prison official or guard can rise to the level of an Eighth Amendment violation." The court adopts the standard of Boddie v. Schneider. The defendant's conduct, if true, is reprehensible but not unconstitutional.
Sexually suggestive comments don't violate the Constitution. See: Jones v. Culinary Manager II, 30 F.Supp.2d 491 (E.D.Pa. 1998).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Jones v. Culinary Manager II
|Cite||30 F.Supp.2d 491 (E.D.Pa. 1998)|