Keeling v. Schaefer.

• Position: DISCIPLINE

U.S. District Court

DUE PROCESS

RESTITUTION

Keeling v. Schaefer, 181 F.Supp.2d 1206 (D.Kan. 2001). A prison inmate brought a [section] 1983 action against corrections officials and a private corporation that employs inmates within a corrections facility. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants on some of the claims. The court held that an employee of the private corporation was not a "state actor" for the purpose of an action alleging Eighth Amendment violations. The court noted that the corporation was not performing a function--correction and rehabilitation of criminals--traditionally performed only by the state. Rather, the corporation was engaged in making a profit through its embroidery business, and the use of inmate labor and its location inside the facility were merely incidental to its business plan.

The court held that corrections officials were not "persons" for the purposes of a [section] 1983 action to the extent that the prisoner was seeking monetary damages from the defendants in their official capacities.

But the court found that fact issues existed, precluding summary judgment, as to whether the employee of the private corporation became a state actor by using prison disciplinary proceedings to obtain a "judgment" against the inmate. The court noted that as private persons, employees of a private corporation operating in a correctional facility were not entitled to a qualified immunity defense in a [section] 1983 action.

The court also found that fact issues as to whether the inmate received procedural due process during a disciplinary hearing precluded summary judgment.

The inmate was working for Impact Design, a private for-profit corporation operating...