Frank Marvin Phillips v. Lynn Hust, Library Staff

477 F.3d 1070 Frank Marvin PHILLIPS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lynn HUST, Library Staff, Defendant-Appellant. No. 04-36021. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted December 9, 2005. * Filed February 13, 2007. Hardy Myers, Attorney General, May H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Richard D. Wasserman, Attorney-in-Charge, Civil/Administrative Appeals Unit, Salem, OR, for the appellant. Frank Marvin Phillips, pro se, Salem, OR, for the appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon; Ancer L. Haggerty, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-01-01252-ALH. Before: BROWNING, D.W. NELSON, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. BROWNING, Circuit Judge: 1 In this case, we must decide whether the arbitrary denial by prison officials of access to materials the prison routinely made available to inmates for the preparation of legal documents constitutes a denial of an inmate's right of access to the courts where it results in the loss of a legal claim. We hold that it does. 2 Defendant-Appellant Lynn Hust appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Frank M. Phillips, Jr. on his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , and the…

In this case, we must decide whether the arbitrary denial by prison officials of access to materials the prison routinely made available to inmates for the preparation of legal documents constitutes a denial of an inmate’s right of access to the courts where it results in the loss of a legal claim. We hold that it does.

Defendant-Appellant Lynn Hust appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Frank M. Phillips, Jr. on his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , and the denial of her motion for summary judgment asserting qualified im *1074 munity. In addition, Hust appeals the district court’s damages award.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 over this appeal of the final judgment of the district court. We affirm the grant of summary judgment to Phillips and the denial of Hust’s qualified immunity claim, and we remand the case to the district court to make further factual findings concerning its award of damages.

I.

Phillips was convicted in state court of second degree manslaughter and sentenced to an indeterminate term of ten years imprisonment, with a minimum sentence of five years for using a firearm during the commission of the offense. Phillips…

dissenting:

I respectfully dissent from the court’s holding that prison librarian Hust’s refusal to allow inmate Phillips access to the prison comb-binding machine hindered his ability to file his petition for certiorari timely in the Supreme Court. I must also *1083 dissent from the court’s holding that Hust is not entitled to qualified immunity.

I

In Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 , 97 S.Ct. 1491 , 52 L.Ed.2d 72 (1977), the Supreme Court held that “the fundamental constitutional right of access to the courts requires prison authorities to assist inmates in the preparation and filing of meaningful legal papers by providing prisoners with adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from persons trained in the law.” Id. at 828 , 97 S.Ct. 1491 . In Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 , 116 S.Ct. 2174 , 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996), the Court subsequently recognized the limits of Bounds when it held that an inmate must demonstrate that official acts or omissions “hindered his efforts to pursue a [non-frivolous] legal claim.” Id. at 351, 116 S.Ct. 2174 ; see also id. at 365 , 116 S.Ct. 2174 (Thomas, J., concurring) (“[T]he majority opinion ... places sensible and much-needed limitations on the…