Opinion ID: 77923
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Al-Amin's Complaint

Text: On March 21, 2005, Al-Amin filed a § 1983 complaint against Warden Smith and Martin in their individual capacities. [10] Attached to the complaint are photocopies of the thirteen envelopes between June 28, 2004 and February 8, 2005, which he alleges were improperly opened before reaching him. [11] The return address on each envelope is Karima's law office address and each is marked legal mail. Four of the envelopes are also marked attorney-client privilege. Al-Amin's lawsuit seeks damages for only these thirteen letters. [12] However, as background, Al-Amin's complaint stresses that during 2003 defendants had previously opened and read his attorney mail and been told to stop. According to Al-Amin's complaint, during 2003, Martin knowingly violated the DOC policy by instructing mailroom staff to open and read his legal mail outside his presence and GSP staff continued to do so even after Head's November 25, 2003 directive to treat Al-Amin's legal mail as privileged. Al-Amin's complaint further alleges that Martin's authorizing of GSP mailroom staff to continue to open and read all of Al-Amin's privileged mail from Karima violated not only the DOC mail policy but also his constitutional rights. As to Warden Smith, the complaint alleges that, after Al-Amin's grievance was sustained, Smith knowingly failed to take corrective actions to ensure that Al-Amin's legal mail was not opened and read outside Al-Amin's presence, thereby violating his constitutional rights. Al-Amin requests: (1) a declaratory judgment that defendants violated his constitutional rights; (2) a permanent injunction ordering defendants to open his attorney mail only in his presence; (3) nominal and punitive damages; and (4) attorney's fees. [13]