Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-88-01374/USCOURTS-ca10-88-01374-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

Fl LED 

Uniccu Scaccs Court of Appeals 

Tenth Cir-:ui, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

MAR .. 8 1990 

S..OBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

JACQUELINE ERVIN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

LARRY MEACHUM, Director of Department 

of Corrections; TED LOGAN, Former 

Warden of Mabel Bassett Correctional 

Center; WILLIE NUFF, Correctional 

Officer of Mabel Bassett Correctional 

Center, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

} 

} 

} 

} 

} No. 88-1374 

) (D.C. No. 87-409-R} 

} (W.D. Okla.} 

} 

} 

} 

} 

} 

} 

} 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before McKAY, SEYMOUR, and MOORE, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal . See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The case is therefore ordered 

In her complaint, plaintiff-appellant alleged claims of 

constitutional violations against the Director of the Oklahoma 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36 . 3. 

Appellate Case: 88-1374 Document: 01019966078 Date Filed: 03/08/1990 Page: 1 
Department of Corrections (Meachum}, the former warden of a 

correctional institution (Logan}, and a prison guard (Nuff}. The 

matter was referred to the United States Magistrate who ordered 

both preparation of a special report by institutional authorities 

and service of process after "necessary service papers have been 

completed by Plaintiff and furnished to the Clerk for processing 

and issuance .... " Shortly thereafter, plaintiff filed a 

praecipe requesting issuance of summons on all defendants by 

certified mail. 

Approximately a month later, plaintiff filed a "return of 

service" to which were attached return receipts purporting to show 

delivery to Meachum and Nuff in the care of (C/0) Meachum. Those 

return receipts were mailed to plaintiff at her institutional 

addre~s. There is no indication of the outcome of plaintiff's 

efforts, ' if any, to deliver papers to Logan. 

By a motion to dismiss, the Attorney Gerreral of Oklahoma 

sought dismissal of the action as to Meachum for failure to state 

a claim. In addition, counsel argued that plaintiff was not 

authorized under the rules to make service, and that the attempted 

service on Logan and Nuff was ineffective. 

The district court dismissed the action as to Meachum for 

failure to state a claim and as to Logan and Nuff for failure to 

make timely service. 

At the outset, we conclude that the district court's 

disposition of plaintiff's claims against Meachum was clearly 

correct. To that extent, the judgment of the district court is 

affirmed. 

2 

Appellate Case: 88-1374 Document: 01019966078 Date Filed: 03/08/1990 Page: 2 
As we understand it, the magistrate's order contemplated that 

plaintiff would furnish necessary papers to the clerk of the 

district court who, in turn, would attempt service as specified by 

plaintiff's praecipe. On the present state of the record, it is 

not clear whether plaintiff furnished required papers and whether 

the district court attempted service as ordered by the magistrate. 

In the absence of a clear showing that plaintiff's failure to make 

service was within her control, we believe that the district 

court's dismissal of the claims against Logan and Nuff were 

premature. Accordingly, it is ordered as follows: 

1. Our order of July 25, 1988, dismissing the appeal is 

VACATED, the mandate is recalled, and this case is reinstated. 

2. The plaintiff is allowed to proceed on appeal without 

prepayment of costs or fees; and 

3. The judgment of the United States District Court for the 

Western District of Oklahoma is AFFIRMED in part, VACATED in part, 

and REMANDED for further proceedings. 

It is further ordered that the mandate shall reissue 

forthwith. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

PER CURIAM 

3 

Appellate Case: 88-1374 Document: 01019966078 Date Filed: 03/08/1990 Page: 3