Perry v. Honton, No. 05-2249 (6th Cir. 2006)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 06a0889n.06 Filed: December 12, 2006 No. 05-2249 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT MILTON WAYNE PERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KATHY HONTON, Head Librarian, Defendant-Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN MEMORANDUM OPINION BEFORE: MARTIN, NORRIS, and GIBBONS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. Plaintiff Milton Wayne Perry, a Michigan prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals from the dismissal of his civil rights suit for failure to state a viable claim. Seeking monetary relief in the amount of $5,000,000.00, plaintiff filed suit against Kathy Honton, head librarian at the Southern Michigan Correctional Facility Reception and Guidance Center, for allegedly failing to make photocopies of plaintiff s application for leave to appeal his criminal conviction to the Michigan Supreme Court. According to the complaint, her actions (or lack thereof) effectively denied him his constitutional right of access to the courts under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 354 (1996). As the district court pointed out in its opinion and order dismissing this suit, in addition to actual injury, a plaintiff must establish more than mere negligence on the part of defendant. See No. 05-2249 Perry v. Horton generally Sims v. Landrum, 170 Fed. Appx. 954, 956 (6th Cir. 2006) (collecting cases). Having had an opportunity to review the record and arguments advanced by plaintiff, we are of the opinion that the district court correctly concluded that plaintiff had not met this burden. A reasoned opinion by this court would merely mirror the analysis provided by the district court and would serve no useful purpose. The judgment of the district court is affirmed based upon its Opinion and Order of Summary Dismissal filed on August 11, 2005. -2-

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.