United States Court of Appeals
Civil Rights – prisoners — sentence credit
Summary judgment was properly granted to the defendants, where the plaintiff sued the wrong parties.
“Peretz’s brief does not even attempt to address how the named state employees were responsible for the arbitrary denial of Peretz’s meritorious good-time credit, or how they had the ability to correct the situation. A genuine issue of material fact is not raised where a plaintiff does not ‘tie actions of the named defendants to the injuries he allegedly suffered.’ Grieveson v. Anderson, 538 F.3d 767, 777-78 (7th Cir. 2008). Peretz cannot demonstrate how any of the named state employees were responsible for the denial of the 93 days of meritorious good-time credit to which he believes he was entitled, or that they had the ability to alter this award. The Director, not the named state employees, had the ability to change Peretz’s award of meritorious good-time credit. There is no genuine issue of material fact because, even if the decision to withhold 93 days of good-time credit was arbitrary, the named state employees were not responsible for the deprivation.”
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, Baker, J., Kanne, J.