Court Opinion

ID: 9465146
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 00:37:23.393151+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:39:00.194534
License: Public Domain

McMILLEN, District Judge,
concurring.
In view of footnote 1, supra, I concur with the foregoing decision, except that I would not remand for the determination of damages arising from plaintiff’s transfer to the State Prison. He is, however, entitled to provable damages on his own behalf for *234interference with his constitutional rights as an advocate for certain innovations at the State Farm.
Plaintiff seeks damages for his inferior living conditions at the State Prison, despite the fact that he lost no good time and was not otherwise punished. Plaintiff had no constitutional right to remain at the State Farm. Although defendants have the right to reassign him to the prison at any time without any reason or hearing, they are nevertheless now being subjected to the possibility of paying^ damages for doing what they had a right to do. Declaratory or injunctive relief should fully resolve plaintiff’s grievance. To award him damages for living under less desirable conditions than he enjoyed at the Farm is an unmerited windfall and an unwise departure from precedent.