The appellant, Ronald Spears, filed this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaining about various aspects of his confinement in administrative segregation at the West Jefferson Correctional Facility in Bessemer, Alabama. He alleged that the conditions of his confinement in administrative segregation violated his rights under the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. He further alleged that administrative segregation was used as a pretext for extended punitive segregation without due process of law. The appellant sought injunctive and declaratory relief. The district court entered summary judgment in favor of the defendants, and Spears appeals. We vacate the judgment of the district court and remand with instructions to dismiss the bulk of appellant's claims as moot and to conduct further proceedings on appellant's due process claim.

This court must review its jurisdiction over an appeal at all times during the appellate process. Ray v. Edwards, 725 F.2d 655, 658 n. 3 (11th Cir. 1984). This court has clearly stated the following:

Absent class certification, an inmate's claim for injunctive and declaratory relief in a section 1983 action fails to present a case or controversy once the inmate has been transferred.

Wahl v. McIver, 773 F.2d 1169, 1173 (11th Cir. 1985).

Appellant filed the present complaint while he was incarcerated at the West Jefferson facility. He specifically challenged the conditions of his administrative segregation at that facility. In fact, he complained that administrative segregation at the West Jefferson facility compared unfavorably to such segregation at other Alabama facilities. The record shows that Spears was transferred to another facility shortly after his complaint was filed. Indeed, he was transferred to one of the facilities which he had alleged was better equipped and more adequate than the West Jefferson facility. At that point, his claims for injunctive and declaratory relief relating to the conditions of his administrative segregation at the West Jefferson facility no longer presented a case or controversy. See id. Thus, the claims regarding the conditions at the West Jefferson facility are moot. On remand, the district court should dismiss those claims.

Appellant has also asserted that the extended use of administrative segregation violates the requirements of due process. The record suggests that appellant has remained in administrative segregation at the facility where he is now incarcerated. Therefore, appellant's due process claim continues to present a live controversy. The district court found that the requirements of due process, as outlined in Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460, 103 S.Ct. 864, 74 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983), had been satisfied through regularly scheduled reviews of appellant's continued administrative segregation status. The court's finding relied upon the assumption that the applicable prison regulations which require periodic reviews had been followed with respect to appellant. There is, however, no documentation in the record to establish that any reviews have actually occurred. We therefore vacate the judgment entered in favor of the defendants on this claim, and remand the case for further proceedings on the issue of whether appellant's status has, in fact, been reviewed regularly as required by prison regulations and the federal constitution.

The judgment of the district court is vacated. We remand the case with instructions to dismiss as moot the claims relating to the conditions of appellant's confinement at West Jefferson and to conduct further proceedings on the remaining due process claim.

VACATED and REMANDED.

Summaries of

Spears v. Thigpen

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Jun 13, 1988

846 F.2d 1327 (11th Cir. 1988)

holding that claims regarding treatment at a facility at which prisoner was no longer incarcerated were moot

Summary of this case from Powell v. Barrett

holding that a prisoner plaintiff's complaints regarding the administrative segregation unit in a particular Alabama prison were moot after the plaintiff's transfer to a different prison

Summary of this case from Brooks v. Edmonds

holding the plaintiff's requests for injunctive and declaratory relief relating to conditions of his confinement at the institution where he was housed when he filed his complaint were moot because he had since been transferred to a different institution

Summary of this case from O'Connor v. Jones

holding the plaintiff's claims for injunctive relief related to conditions of confinement at a previous correctional facility were subject to dismissal because those claims "no longer presented a case or controversy"

Summary of this case from Bailey v. Smith

holding a prisoner's claims for injunctive relief based on the conditions of his confinement "no longer presented a case or controversy" because he was transferred

Summary of this case from Maldonado v. Baker Cnty. Sheriff's Office

Summary of this case from Browning v. Buda

holding that claims regarding treatment at a facility at which prisoner was no longer incarcerated were moot

Summary of this case from Washington v. Jones

holding a prisoner's claims for injunctive relief based on the conditions of his confinement became moot when he was transferred

Summary of this case from Pullen v. Brown

holding that prisoner's claims regarding treatment at a facility where he was no longer incarcerated were moot

Summary of this case from Gillis v. Hosseini

holding inmate's claims against medical treatment providers to be moot due to his transfer to another prison

Summary of this case from Smith v. Dozier

holding inmate's claims for declaratory and injunctive relief regarding treatment at a facility at which inmate was no longer incarcerated were moot

Summary of this case from Foster-Bey v. Hill

holding that claims regarding treatment at a facility at which prisoner was no longer incarcerated were moot

Summary of this case from Payne v. Ashley

holding that claims regarding treatment at facility at which prisoner was no longer incarcerated were moot

Summary of this case from Smith v. Courtney

holding that a claim seeking injunctive relief is moot once the prisoner has been transferred to a different prison

Summary of this case from Nolley v. Nelson

holding that inmate's claims regarding treatment at a facility at which inmate was no longer incarcerated were moot

Summary of this case from Smith v. Courtney

holding that claims regarding treatment at facility at which prisoner was no longer incarcerated were moot

Summary of this case from San Antonio v. Henry

holding that a prisoner's claim seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in a § 1983 action becomes moot once the prisoner has been transferred

Summary of this case from Davis v. Georgia Department of Corrections

finding that claims specific to facility were mooted by transfer but challenge to systemic use of segregation remained live where plaintiff remained in segregation after transfer

Summary of this case from Gayle v. Meade

finding that the plaintiff's claims for injunctive and declaratory relief regarding the conditions at the prison were moot since the plaintiff was transferred to another facility shortly after the complaint was filed

Summary of this case from Gonzalez v. Hemphill

finding prisoner's claim for injunctive relief regarding conditions of confinement at prison moot where prisoner was no longer incarcerated at prison

Summary of this case from RIX v. WELLS

concluding that an incarcerated person's "claims for injunctive and declaratory relief relating to the conditions of" confinement at a correctional facility became moot once the person was transferred to another facility

Summary of this case from Wimbush v. Conway

recognizing prisoner's claims concerning prison conditions are moot when prisoner transferred to another facility

Summary of this case from Rowan v. Harris

noting that, in this circumstance, there is no longer a "case or controversy once the inmate has been transferred"

Summary of this case from Owens v. Centurion Med.

explaining an inmate's § 1983 claim for injunctive or declaratory relief are moot once the inmate has been transferred

Summary of this case from Hathcock v. Cohen

In Spears, supra, an Alabama prison inmate filed a § 1983 complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief alleging that West Jefferson's administrative segregation's conditions of confinement were less desirable than other institutions' segregation units.

Summary of this case from Lang v. Stringer

Spears v. Thigpen

Summary

Opinion

Spears v. Thigpen

Spears v. Thigpen

Case Details

Citations

Citing Cases

Spears v. Thigpen

Summary

Opinion

Spears v. Thigpen

Spears v. Thigpen

Case Details

CitationsCopy Citation

Citing Cases

Citations