Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_14-cv-00333/USCOURTS-ared-4_14-cv-00333-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Doe
Defendant
Jamie Shawn McCall
Plaintiff
Shock
Defendant
Lloyd Vincent
Defendant

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

WESTERN DIVISION 

JAMIE SHAWN McCALL 

ADC #610019 PLAINTIFF 

v. No. 4:14-cv-333-DPM 

SHOCK, Sheriff, Faulkner County; 

DOE, Major, Faulkner County Jail; and 

LLOYD VINCENT, Captain, Faulkner 

County Jail 

ORDER 

DEFENDANTS 

On de novo review, the Court adopts the recommendation, NQ 65, as 

supplemented and overrules McCall's objections, NQ 71. FED. R. Crv. P. 

72(b)(3). 

1. Tuberculosis lights and testing. Courts have upheld similar 

tuberculosis-prevention measures. Gibbs v. Grimmette, 254 F.3d 545 (5th Cir. 

2001). Thus, even if the measures taken here were constitutionally 

inadequate, that inadequacy was not clearly established. Plumhoff v. Rickard, 

134 S. Ct. 2012, 2022-23 (2014). 

2. Cleaning cups and spoons. Requiring inmates to wash their cups 

and spoons with the same soap they use to clean their bodies would be 

troubling. But the undisputed fact is that inmates are given two small bars of 

Case 4:14-cv-00333-DPM Document 75 Filed 09/08/15 Page 1 of 2
soap each week. E.g., NQ 71 at 3. The Court sees no reason why inmates can't 

use one bar for personal hygiene and the other for cleaning their jail-issued 

mess kits. While perhaps not ideal, under the totality of the circumstances, 

thisconditionisn'tclearlyunconstitutionaleither. Cf Stickleyv. Byrd,703F.3d 

421, 423-24 (8th Cir. 2013). 

*** 

The conditions McCall complains of may u merit[ ] some management 

criticism[.]" Stickley, 703F.3dat423-24 (internal quotation omitted). But they 

don't amount to violations of clearly established constitutional rights by 

Defendants Shock and Vincent. Because McCall can't clear the high bar 

qualified immunity sets, Shock and Vincent's motion for summary judgment, 

NQ 51, is granted. McCall's claims against them will be dismissed with 

prejudice. McCall's claims against the John Doe Defendant will be dismissed 

without prejudice for failure to serve. 

So Ordered. 

(I D.P. Marshall Jr. 

United States District Judge 

-2-

Case 4:14-cv-00333-DPM Document 75 Filed 09/08/15 Page 2 of 2