Michael J. Brodheim

Michael J. Brodheim was a California prisoner and plaintiff in litigation protecting prisoners’ right to file grievances. In Brodheim v. Cry, he alleged that an appeals coordinator’s warning and later recommendation to transfer him retaliated against his complaints and legal activity. On October 28, 2009, the Ninth Circuit reversed summary judgment for the officials and sent the case back for further proceedings, while affirming the denial of Brodheim’s own request for partial summary judgment because material facts remained disputed. The opinion says the recommended transfer was not carried out. Official district-court records identify him as C-46663, matching the prisoner in the governor’s 2013 parole report. His underlying first-degree murder conviction concerned the February 28, 1981 killing of Kristin Malmquist; the report gives his arrest as March 4, 1981 and records a June 7, 2013 parole reversal. The rights litigation does not establish that the murder conviction was wrongful or political. An independent federal court record quotes an earlier parole transcript giving the same March 4 arrest day. Citing the abstract of judgment, it records conviction on March 18, 1982 and sentencing on May 3, 1982 to a nominal 25 years to life. Initial prison admission and actual release remain unverified.

In a discovery order dated July21,2005 and filed July22 (Brodheim v.Cry, Eastern District of California, case2:02-cv-00573, document85), Magistrate Judge Peter A.Nowinski partly granted Brodheim’s December16,2004 motion to compel. The order required Michael Cry to explain the degree of care his warning demanded in prison grievance writing and the consequences of noncompliance. It describes Brodheim as a state prisoner alleging First Amendment retaliation; the discovery ruling does not determine the ultimate merits, reverse his underlying conviction or order release. Official source package: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-00573/pdf/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-00573-0.pdf

The appellate opinion dates the underlying California Medical Facility grievance incident to May 10, 2001, the initial grievance to May 21, and Cry’s handwritten warning on the interview request to June 21. It dates filing of the federal action to March 19, 2002 and Cry’s transfer-recommendation memorandum to June 8, 2004. That memorandum complained that Brodheim assisted other inmates in filing grievances. The opinion expressly says he was neither transferred nor disciplined in response; his complaints were instead assigned to another coordinator. The Ninth Circuit held that an implicit warning could support a retaliation claim despite his persistence in filing grievances, but disputed facts prevented judgment in his favor. The remand reinstated his state-law claims as well. These dates concern protected grievance activity and litigation, not a new prison admission, actual punitive transfer or discharge. Source: https://joeelfordlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/brodheim.opinion.pdf#page=3; pages 4–10.

The July 2007 magistrate’s findings and recommendations proposed summary judgment for defendants in Brodheim’s retaliation litigation. This is an intermediate civil ruling, preceding the later appellate reversal already described in his profile, and is not a new criminal conviction or prison sentence. Source: Brodheim v. Cry, July 2007 findings and recommendations, PDF page 1. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-00573/pdf/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-00573-14.pdf#page=1