Entler v. Gregoire, No. 14-35053 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThreats to sue fall within the purview of the constitutionally protected right to file grievances. Both the filing of a criminal complaint by a prisoner, as well as the threat to do so, are protected by the First Amendment, provided they are not baseless. Plaintiff, a prisoner at the Washington State Penitentiary (WSP), filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983, alleging that his First Amendment rights were violated when he was disciplined for threatening to initiate civil litigation and file a criminal complaint against prison officials. The Ninth Circuit held that because plaintiff had alleged cognizable First Amendment retaliation claims regarding his threats to sue, and qualified immunity did not attach, it was improper to dismiss the complaint in its entirety under Rule 12(c). However, in regard to plaintiff's threat to file a criminal complaint, even though it was a constitutionally protected right, qualified immunity attached. Therefore, dismissal of that aspect of the complaint was proper. Accordingly, the court reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded.
Court Description: Prisoner Civil Rights. The panel reversed in part and affirmed in part the district court’s dismissal, on the pleadings, of a complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a prisoner who alleged that his First Amendment rights were violated when he was disciplined for threatening to initiate civil litigation and file a criminal complaint against prison officials. Plaintiff was disciplined for his threats under a Washington Department of Corrections regulation that bars prisoners from intimidating or coercing prison staff. With regard to plaintiff’s threats to bring civil litigation, the panel disagreed with the district court’s conclusions that plaintiff has not alleged an actionable First Amendment retaliation claim and that, alternatively, the prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity. The panel held that threats to sue fall within the purview of the constitutionally protected right to file grievances and that in 2012 it was clearly established that plaintiff had a right to file his grievances and pursue civil litigation. The panel held that taking the complaint as true in the face of a Rule 12(c) motion to dismiss on the pleadings, it could not conclude that a reasonable official would not have understood that disciplining plaintiff for threatening to file a civil suit was constitutionally impermissible. ENTLER V. GREGOIRE 3 With regard to the discipline imposed for plaintiff’s threat to file a criminal complaint, the panel held that both the filing of a criminal complaint by a prisoner, as well as the threat to do so, are protected by the First Amendment, provided they are not baseless. The panel nevertheless held that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established at the time that the threat to file a criminal complaint was constitutionally protected conduct.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.