Bratcher v. Clarke, No. 1:2017cv00474 - Document 80 (E.D. Va. 2018)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Anthony J Trenga on 9/26/2018. (lcre, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Bratcher v. Clarke Doc. 80 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division Joseph Bratcher, Plaintiff, I:17cv474(AJT/MSN) V. Harold Clarke, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Joseph Bratcher, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro has filed a civil rights action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.ยง 1983, alleging that the Virginia Department of Corrections' new policy concerning "Incoming Offender Correspondence" violates his constitutional rights. Now before the Court are plaintiffs Renewed Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Dkt. No. 55, and a Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Harold Clarke, the Director of the VDOC and the sole defendant in the lawsuit. Dkt. No. 58. For the reasons which follow, the Renewed Motion for Preliminary Injunction will be denied, and the Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment will be granted. 1. Background In the Amended Complaint, which is the operative complaint in the lawsuit, Bratcher states that he has been incarcerated at various correctional institutions within Virginia since April 24,2013,and has been in Virginia Department of Corrections("VDOC")custody since November 2015. Dkt. No. 10 at 1-2. During that time Bratcher has communicated with his family and friends "by phone, regular mail, and since entering the custody of defendant Clarke and the VDOC,JPay secure messaging(a form of email-like prison messaging, each message costing a 'stamp', which is approximately the same price as a postage stamp, with extrta [sic] 1 Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
