In Gallagher v. Shelton, (10th Cir., Nov. 24, 2009), the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected various claims by an Jewish inmate that prison officials delayed and inadequately accomodated his requests for a kosher diet, and that the prison chaplain failed to help him get a menorah and candles to celebrate Hanukkah. Several of the allegations involved merely isolated acts of negligence by prison officials. The court remanded to clarify that claims dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies were dismissed without prejudice.
In Kuperman v. Warden, New Hampshire State Prison, (D NH, Nov. 20, 2009), a New Hampshire federal district court dismissed on mootness and collateral estoppel grounds a Jewish prisoner's complaint over rules that automatically suspended his kosher meal privileges for a single violation in which he purchased or consumed non-kosher food. The prison has subsequently modified its rules giving prisoners more leeway before suspending access to a religious diet. The Concord Monitor reported on the decision. (See prior related posting.)
In Elliott v. Sims, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108365 (SD OH, Nov. 4, 2009), an Ohio federal district court permitted inmates from separate prisons to bring a single action challenging prison authorities' refusal to permit them to abstain from work on Sundays violates their religious exercise rights under RLUIPA.
Atkins v. Christiansen, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108503 (WD MI, Nov. 20, 2009), involves a claim for an injunction and damages by an inmate who alleges that he was wrongly designated as a member of a Security Threat Group because he attended Nation of Islam religious services. A Michigan federal district court, accepting a magistrate's recommendations in part (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108545, July 13, 2009) held that plaintiff's official capacity monetary relief claims are barred by the 11th Amendment; certain of the claims were time barred; that summary judgment would be premature as to qualified immunity; and that a claim for monetary damages may be asserted in individual capacity claims under RLUIPA.
In Chalif v. Artus, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109813 (ND NY, Nov. 24, 2009), a New York federal district court accepted the recommendations of a magistrate judge (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109814, Oct. 15, 2009) and dismissed claims by an inmate that he was prevented from practicing his religion (Church of Jesus Christ Christian), that his religious materials were wrongfully seized, and that other inmates are allowed to practice supremacist religions, but he was not.
