Opinion ID: 719341
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Legal Supplies

Text: 2 Lacy claims that his right of access was violated because he requested supplies for legal work (he apparently asked for writing tablets and pens) and the supplies were never delivered to him. An inmate is entitled to necessary scribe materials, which include paper and some means of writing. Gentry v. Duckworth, 65 F.3d 555, 558 (7th Cir.1995). 1 However, a prisoner must show detriment in order to prevail on a claim of denial of access to the courts. Id.; Smith v. Shawnee Library System, 60 F.3d 317, 323 (7th Cir.1995). Detriment may be shown if the prison officials' conduct resulted in the interruption and/or delay of plaintiff's pending or contemplated litigation. Hossman v. Spradlin, 812 F.2d 1019, 1021 n. 2 (7th Cir.1987). 3 The district court held that Lacy failed to show that the denial of legal supplies interfered with his litigation. Lacy alleged that he had a case pending in the Seventh Circuit that was dismissed because he was unable to respond. Lacy, however, did not submit any evidence to the district court supporting this assertion: he did not, for instance, identify the case name and number or submit a copy of the order dismissing the case. Thus, he created no genuine issue of material fact regarding detriment, so the district court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants. 2