2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 5-15-2008 

# M a ye r v . V arne r P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 06-1432

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " M a ye r v . V arne r " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1220. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/1220NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N os . 05- 4004 and 06- 1432 TROI M AYER, A ppel l ant

v. SU PE R I N T E N D E N T B E N V A R N E R , SC I D al l as ; L T . SU T L I FF, Secur i tyL i eut enantat SCI Dal l a s ; CA PT. SCHO ON OV ER, Se c u r i tyCa p t a i n a tSCI Dal l a s ; KEN NETH B U R N E T T , G r i evanc e C oor di nat oratSC I D al l as ; K E L L Y A . G A L L A G H E R , Phy s i ci an A ssi st ant atS C I D al l as; U N K N O W N S E A R C H T E A M O ffi cers atS C I D al l as; U N K N O W N B L O C K O F F IC E R S F B l ock C orr ect i on O ffi cers atS C I D al l as, al l 3 shift s; B O N N I E M A L L O Y , U ni tM anage ratSC I D al l as ; PA T R I C I A G I N O C H E T T I , C hi ef H eal th C ar e A dm i ni s tr at oratSC I D al l as ; T . ST A C H E L E K , D eputySuper i nt endentfor Faci l i t i es M anage m entatSC I D al l as ; T H O M A S L A V A N , D eputySuper i nt endentfor C entr al i zed S ervi ces atS C I D al l as; L T . P O S T , A rea Lieut enan tatS C I D al l as; SUPERI NTEN DEN T J EFF REY A. BEA RD , Dep a r t me n to f Corr e c t i o n s ; THO M AS L. J AM E S , S p e c i a l As s i s t a n tt o th e S e c r e t a ryf o rth e De p a r t me n to f

Co rr e c t i o n s ; RA NDY S E A R S , D epu tyC hief C ou nsel for the P enn sy l van i a D epart m ent of C orr ect i on s; M A R T IN F . H O R N , S ecret aryof C orr ect i on s for the D epart m ent of C orr ect i on s; RO BE RT S. BI TN ER , Chi e f Hea r i ng Exa mi ne rof the D e pa r t mentof

Cor r e c t i on s ; CL I FF O ’H A R A , D i rect or of t he P rofessi on al R espon si bil i tyfor the D epart m ent of C orr ect i on s; CO M M ONWE AL T H OF P E NNS YL VANI A; P E NNS YL VANI A DE P AR T M E NT OF C O R R E C T IO N S ; E D W A R D G . R E N D E L L , G ov ernor of P enn sy l van i a; *G E R A L D J. PA PPE R T , A T T O R N E Y G E N E R A L O F PE N N SY L V A N I A ; L T . N O T I V I N SK Y , O ffi ce o f P rof essio n al R esp o n sibil ity -D O C ; SG T . R O B E R T J. S M IT H , C o rrecti o n s O ff icer, SCI - Dal l a s ; J OH N FLA HER TY, Corr e c t i o n s Off i c e r , SCI - Dal l a s ; LOU I S S EW ELL, C orr ect i on s O ffi cer, S C I- D al l as; G E O R G E M IK O , C orr ect i on s O ffi cer, S C I- D al l as; A L FR E D R O X B Y , C orr ect i ons O ffi cer , SC I - D al l as ; J O SE PH O L SZ K Y , C orr ect i ons O ffi cer , SC I - D al l as ; W I L L I A M B O W D E N , C orr ect i ons O ffi cer , SC I - D al l as *Pur s uantt o F. R . A . P. 43( c) O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e M id d le D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia2 ( M . D . Pa. C i v. A ct i on N o. 01- cv- 01762 ) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e Sy l vi a H . R ambo Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

M ay1, 2008 B efor e: SL O V I T E R , B A R R Y A N D G R E E N B E R G , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: M ay15, 2008)

___________ OP I NI ON

___________ P E R C UR I AM T r oi M ay er , a Penns y l vani a pr i s onerpr ocee di ng pr o s e, appea l s fr om a j udgm ent of the U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ctC our tforthe M i ddl e D i s tr i ctof Penns y l vani a i n favorof c o rr e c t i o n s o f

f i c e r s i n h i s c i v i l r i g h t s a c t i o n . W e wi l l a f f i r m. I n hi s amended compl ai nt , M ay eral l eged that , w hi l e he w as hous ed i n the r es tr i ct ed hous i ng uni t , SC I - D al l as C orr ect i ons O ffi cer s W i l l i am B ow den and J os eph O lszyk sea rch ed h is cell , an d d estroy ed an d d am ag ed h is pro p erty , inclu d ing lega l pap ers re late d to h is s tate p o st-c o n v ictio n p ro c e e d in g s. M a y e r a v e rre d th a t O f f ice rs L o u is Sew el l , A l fr ed R oxby , G eor ge M i ko, and J ohn Fl ahertyw er e pr es ent , and thatO ffi cer R o b e rt S m ith p a c k e d th e c o n te n ts o f h is c e ll. M a y e r f u rth e r a lleg e d th a t, af

ter h e f iled a g rie v a n c e c o n c e rn in g th is in c id e n t, K el l yG al l agher , a phy s i ci an’ s as s i s t ant , r et al i at ed aga i ns thi m bycal l i ng hi m t o the m e d i c a l a r e a , i n t e n t i o n a l l y p e r f o r m i n g a s u r g i c a l p r o c e d u r e o n th e w r o n g p a r to f h i s b o d y,M ay er ’ s appea l fr om the entr yof j udgm enti n favorof the corr ect i ons offi cer s w as 1 docket ed as C . A . N o. 05- 4004. M ay erfi l ed anothernot i ce of appea l aft erthe D i s tr i ct C o u rt d e n ie d h is m o tio n f o r a n e w tr ia l; th a t a p p e a l w a s d o c k e te d a s C .A . N o . 0 6 -1 4 3 2 . M ay er ’ s appea l atC . A . N o. 06- 1432 w as t erm i nat ed forfai l ur e t o paythe fi l i ng fee , and then condi t i onal l yr eopene d and cons ol i dat ed w i th C . A . N o. 05- 4004 pendi ng ourrul i ng on hi s m ot i on t o s etas i de the t erm i nat i on or der . A l though M ay erar gues thathi s s econd not i ce of appea l w as an amended not i ce of appea l i n hi s appea l docket ed atC . A . N o. 05- 4004, hi s D ece m ber19, 2005, m ot i on forr econs i der at i on di d nott ol l the t i m e t o fi l e an appea l fr om the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s N ovember28, 2005, or derdeny i ng hi s m ot i on fora new tr i al . T urnerv. E ver s , 726 F. 2d 112, 114 ( 3d C i r . 1984) . T hus , M ay er ’ s J anuary23, 2006, not i ce of

appea l w as unt i m el yas t o the N ovember28, 2005, or der , and di d not cons t i tut e an a m ended not i ce of appea l . A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l denyM ay er ’ s m ot i on t o s et as i de the O ct ober10, 2006, or dert erm i nat i ng C . A . N o. 06- 1432. 3 a n d f a lse lyre p o rtin g th a t h e e x p o se d h im se lf d u rin g th e p ro c e d u re . M a y e r w a s p lac e d in the r es tr i ct ed hous i ng uni tbas ed on the expos ur e cha r ge and r emai ned ther e unt i l he w as tr a n s f e rr e d to a n o th e r i n s titu tio n . D ur i ng pr etr i al pr ocee di ngs , M ay err epea t edl yw r ot e t o the D i s tr i ctC our t , s t at i ng thatpr i s on offi ci al s w er e w i thhol di ng hi s l egal m at er i al s and pr event i ng hi m fr om litig a tin g h is c a s e . A s a re s u lt, th e D is tr ic t C o u rt o b ta in e d c o u n s e l to re p re s e n t h im . S h o rtlyb e f

o re trial, M a y e r, th ro u g h c o u n se l, ag re e d a t a p re trial c o n f e re n c e to d ism iss h is claim s ag ains t G all ag h er, Flah erty , an d S m ith . M ay er’s ca se p roc ee d ed to a tw o -da yjury tr i al on hi s cl ai m s agai ns tthe r emai ni ng corr ect i ons offi cer s . T he D i s tr i ctC our tgr ant ed the corr ect i ons offi cer s ’ m ot i on forj udgm entas a mat t erof l aw on M ay er ’ s cl ai m s that th e o f f ice rs d e n ied h im a c c e ss to th e c o u rts b yd e stro y in g h is le g a l p a p e rs a n d v io late d h is due pr oces s r i ght s . T he j uryr eturned a ve r di ctforthe off i cer s on M ay er ’ s s t at e l aw conver s i on cl ai m . T hi s appea l fol l ow ed. 14

A l though M ay eras s ert s thathe i s chal l engi ng everyor derent er ed i n the u n d e rly in g p ro c e e d in g s, w e w ill c o n sid e r o n lyth e iss u e s th a t M a y e r h a s a d d re ss e d in h is br i ef. T hes e i s s ues fal l i nt o t w o cat egor i es – di s coveryvi ol at i ons and att orney m i s conduct . Fi r s t , M ay ercl ai m s thatthe def endant s fai l ed t o turn overdocument s dur i ng di s covery . M ay err ai s ed thi s i s s ue i n the D i s tr i ctC our ti n m ot i ons t o compel the p ro d u c tio n o f

d o c u m e n ts. T h e re c o rd re f lec ts th a t th e D istric t C o u rt o rd e re d M a y e r to su b m it a list o f

d o c u m e n ts th a t h e m a in tain e d w e re n o t p ro d u c e d . T h e d e f e n d a n ts resp o n d ed to M ay er’s su b m issi o n , an d the M ag istrate Ju d g e a d d resse d ea ch o f M ay er’s documentr eques t s and or der ed the def endant s t o pr oduce c ert ai n document s . M ay er appea l ed, and the D i s tr i ctC our tfur theror der ed the def endant s t o pr ovi de M ay ercopi es of ce r t ai n document s . M ay erhas nots how n thatthe D i s tr i ctC our tabus ed i t s di s cr et i on in its d isc o v e ryru lin g s. M a y e r o n lym a k e s th e u n f o u n d e d a lleg a tio n th a t th e d e f e n d a n ts m i s r epr es ent ed i n t hei rdi s coveryr es pons es thattheydi d nothave doc um ent s thathe re q u e s te d . M a y e r a lso a rg u e s th a t h is c o u rt-a p p o in ted a tto rn e y , am o n g o th e r th in g s, f a iled to p re p a re f o r tria l, fa iled to a d e q u a telyp re se n t h is c a se to th e ju ry , fa iled to p ro p e rly ques t i on the w i tnes s es , and for ced hi m t o di s m i s s hi s cl ai m s agai ns tG al l agher . T he re m e d yin a c iv il c a s e , in w h ic h c h o s e n c o u n s e l is n e g lig e n t, is a n a c tio n f o r m a lp ra c tic e . K us hnerv. W i nt erthurSw i s s I ns . C o. , 620 F. 2d 404, 408 ( 3d C i r . 1980) . T o the ext ent thatnegl i gentr epr es ent at i on bycourt - appoi nt ed couns el m aypr ovi de gr ounds fora new5

tr i al , M ay erhas nots how n t hata new tr i al i s w arr ant ed. W e ar e unabl e t o r evi ew M ay er ’ s cl ai m thatcouns el fai l ed t o adequa t el yr epr es enthi m attr i al beca us e M ay erhas n o t arrang ed to h av e h is tri al tran scribe d . T h e re co rd, ho w ev er, do es re flec t th at M ay er’s d ec isi o n to d rop G all ag h er f rom the c ase w as k n o w ing an d v o lun tary , an d that M ay er’s couns el fi l ed a pr etr i al m emora ndum , exhi bi tl i s t , pr opos ed voi rdi r e, and poi nt s for c h a rg e in p re p a ra tio n f

o r tria l. M a y e r f u rth e r a rg u e s th a t o p p o sin g c o u n se l an d h is o w n a tto rn e ye n g a g e d in m isc o n d u c t. M a y e r c o n ten d s th a t o p p o sin g c o u n se l allo w e d th e d e f e n d a n ts to lie a t trial, th a t o p p o sin g c o u n se l an d h is a tto rn e yc o n sp ire d to d e stro yh is c laim s, a n d th a t h is att orneyw or ked w i th oppos i ng couns el and had a confl i ctof i nt er es t . M ay erhas offe r ed n o s u p p o rt f

o r t h e s e a lle g a tio n s . F inally , M ay er states in h is brief tha t he a p p ea ls th e d ism issal of h is cl aim s b ef

o re the jurygo this case, presum ablyreferri ng t o the D i stri ctC ou rt ’s grantof judg m ent as a m att erof l aw on hi s cons t i tut i onal cl ai m s . M ay erhas notadequa t el ydevel oped thi s i s s ue fo r ou r rev iew , an d w e d o n o t r ea ch it . S o u thw estern P a. G row th A ll ianc e v . B row n er, 1 2 1 F .3 d 1 0 6 , 1 2 2 (3 d C ir . 1 9 9 7 ). A cc o rdin g ly , w e sh all af firm the ju d g m en t of

the D istri ct C o u rt . M ay er’s out s t andi ng m ot i ons ar e deni ed, i ncl udi ng hi s m ot i on t o s etas i de the C l erk’ s or derthat t erm i nated hi s appea l atC . A . N o. 06 -1432 for fai l ure t o p aythe fil i ng fees.