Angela Schuncey Richardson v. Dennis McGinnis, Sgt., McPherson Unit, ADC

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 23-2142
___________________________
Angela Schuncey Richardson,
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant,
v.
Dennis McGinnis, Sgt., McPherson Unit, ADC,
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee.
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Northern
____________
Submitted: July 14, 2023
Filed: October 3, 2023
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Angela Richardson appeals the district court’s dismissal, under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), of her action under 42 U.S.C. §
1983 alleging violations of her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

-- 1 of 2 --

We grant Richardson leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See Henderson v.
Norris, 129 F.3d 481, 484-85 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam). We conclude on de novo
review that the district court did not err in dismissing Richardson’s retaliation claim
or her official-capacity equal protection claim. We conclude, however, that
Richardson adequately stated an individual-capacity equal protection claim: she
alleged that she and other African American inmates were denied privileges afforded
to Caucasian inmates, and that rules were unequally enforced against them on
multiple occasions. See Powells v. Minnehaha Cty. Sheriff Dep’t, 198 F.3d 711, 712
(8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam). While the consequences of the alleged incidents were
not grave, Richardson’s injuries need not be severe enough to implicate the Eighth
Amendment in order to state an equal protection claim if the alleged injuries were
inflicted because of racial prejudice. See Black Spotted Horse v. Else, 767 F.2d 516,
517 (8th Cir. 1985). Our decision in Lewis v. Jacks, 486 F.3d 1025 (8th Cir. 2007),
requiring an allegation of “pervasive or severe” action by a correctional official, was
limited to a claim of verbal abuse. Id. at 1028.
Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of Richardson’s retaliation claim and
official-capacity equal protection claim. We reverse the dismissal of her individual-
capacity equal protection claim, and remand the case to the district court for further
proceedings.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --