Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Davis v. Ludwick

United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division

April 15, 2015

GEORGE DAVIS, Plaintiff,
v.
NICK LUDWICK, STEVE RIVARD, GARY MINIARD, KELLY BEST-BARNETT, GANZALES, Defendants.

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [#29] AND CANCELING HEARING SET FOR APRIL 15, 2015

HON. GERSHWIN A. DRAIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff George Davis is an inmate at the Gus Harrison Correctional Facility in Adrian, Michigan. Plaintiff filed the present civil rights action, under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, against several Michigan Department of Corrections employees. He alleges that Defendants violated his First, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights when they failed to protect him from a purported assault that occurred on December 28, 2009.

Defendants Steve Rivard, Gary Miniard, and Kelly Best-Barnett (hereinafter “Defendants”) filed the present motion for summary judgment. Doc No. 29. Specifically, Defendants argue that Plaintiff’s suit is barred due to the statute of limitations; Defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity; and Plaintiff’s failure to demonstrate that Defendants were aware of an obvious and excessive risk to Plaintiff’s health and safety.

The Court finds no need for a hearing. See E.D. Mich. L.R. 7.1(f)(2). For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Defendants’ motion.

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff is an inmate currently serving his sentence at Gus Harrison Correction Facility in Adrian, Michigan. The series of incidents that allegedly precipitated Plaintiff’s assault began on October 10, 2009. On this date, Plaintiff, who was then incarcerated at the Pine River Correctional Facility, alleges that he was brutally attacked and stabbed by other prisoners.

As a result of the incident, Plaintiff was transferred to the St. Louis Correctional Facility (“SLF”). The facility is directly across the street from Pine River Correctional Facility.

Plaintiff asserts that due to close proximity, inmates between the two facilities communicate quite frequently. Plaintiff further asserts that because of the frequent communication, he was concerned that other prisoners would retaliate against him. For this reason, upon arriving at the SLF, Plaintiff claims that he informed each Defendant that he feared for his life.

On December 28, 2009, Plaintiff claims that he was again brutally attacked. He asserts that he was stabbed twice in the lower, right hip by another inmate. He also asserts that his coat prevented further bodily injuries.

Plaintiff’s injuries required emergency medical treatment at the Gratiot Medical Center. There, he was treated with antibiotics and then bandaged for two puncture wounds-each about one centimeter in size-on his right hip.

Plaintiff’s medical records from December 28, 2009, indicate that both sites had small amounts of bright red blood oozing from the puncture wounds. On December 29, 2009, his medical records indicate that there was no active bleeding, swelling, heat, or redness. His medical records, dated December 30, 2009, indicate that there was no infection at the puncture sites. In the interim, Plaintiff was placed in administrative segregation for his protection.

Defendants assert that Plaintiff was unable to identify his attacker. In addition, they assert that no critical incident report about the event was generated. On the other hand, Plaintiff admits that while he is unable to identify his attackers by name, he is able to identify them by photo. He claims, however, that he was not given the opportunity to properly do so.

On January 8, 2010, Plaintiff filed a grievance concerning this matter. Plaintiff’s final, Step III grievance appeal was subsequently denied. On June 3, 2010, the grievance appeal denial was mailed to Plaintiff. As a ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.