Filed Date: Dec. 30, 1981
Closed Date: 1990
Clearinghouse coding complete
On 12/30/1981, William E. Martin, an inmate at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility filed a Section 1983 suit, pro se, in the Southern District of Ohio against officials of the facility. Plaintiff's complaint raised First and Fourteenth Amendment challenges concerning censorship of incoming prisoner mail. At some point private counsel agreed to represent the plaintiff.
The District Court (Judge Spiegel) held that plaintiff had failed to state a claim under the Eighth Amendment and permitted plaintiff to file an amended complaint. The matter was referred to a magistrate judge who recommended that summary judgment be granted to defendants on each of the claims. Judge Spiegel adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation and granted defendants' motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff appealed arguing that the Ohio Administrative Code, which allowed prison officials to censor mail, was unconstitutional on its face.
The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded. The Sixth Circuit (Judge Contie) held the regulation violated due process because it did not provide inmates the option to appeal to a third party prior to the letter being returned to sender. Martin v. Kelley, 803 F.2d 236 (6th Cir. 1986).
The PACER docket states that the proceedings for this case are not available and that the case was terminated on April 24, 1990.
Summary Authors
Eoghan Keenan (7/15/2005)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/9025161/parties/martin-v-kelley/
Celebrezze, Anthony Joseph (Ohio)
Contie, Leroy John Jr. (Ohio)
Jones, Nathaniel Raphael (Ohio)
Dorsey, Edward Schmertz (Ohio)
Adler, Allen Paul (Ohio)
Celebrezze, Anthony Joseph (Ohio)
Contie, Leroy John Jr. (Ohio)
Jones, Nathaniel Raphael (Ohio)
Peck, John Weld II (Ohio)
Spiegel, S. Arthur (Ohio)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/9025161/martin-v-kelley/
Last updated March 26, 2024, 3:10 a.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: Ohio
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Dec. 30, 1981
Closing Date: 1990
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Inmate bringing civil rights complaint challenging regulation concerning censorship of incoming prisoner mail
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: Yes
Class Action Sought: Unknown
Class Action Outcome: Unknown
Defendants
Ohio Department of Corrections, State
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Order Duration: 1986 - None
Issues
General:
Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:
Type of Facility: