United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division
VIRGINIA PAIGE JENKINS, Administratrix of Estate of Erin Jenkins, Plaintiff,
SHERIFF C.T. WOODY, et al., Defendants.
Hannah Eauck United States Judge
matter comes before the Court on the following motions: (1)
Defendant Sheriff C.T. Woody's Motion for Summary
Judgment, (ECF No. 137); and, (2) Defendant Deputy Elizabeth
Beaver's Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 145).
Sheriff Woody and Deputy Beaver filed the motions for summary
judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
Virginia Paige Jenkins has responded to both motions for summary
judgment, (ECF Nos. 165, 167,  180), and both Sheriff Woody and
Deputy Beaver have replied, (ECF Nos. 200, 201). The Court
heard oral argument, and the matter is ripe for disposition.
The Court exercises jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1331 and 1367. For the reasons that follow, the
Court will grant in part and deny in part the Sheriff Woody
Motion for Summary Judgment and deny the Deputy Beaver Motion
for Summary Judgment.
Factual and Procedural Background
filed a Complaint against various defendants alleging, on
behalf of Ms. Jenkins's estate, violations of the
Fourteenth Amendment,  state law negligence, and medical
malpractice. (ECF No. 1.) After Plaintiff filed her First
Amended Complaint, (ECF No. 25), this Court granted in part
and denied in part two motions to dismiss filed separately by
Sheriff Woody and Defendant Correct Care Solutions, LLC
("CCS"), (ECF No. 50). With leave of court,
Plaintiff filed her Second Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 51.)
Following an Initial Pretrial Conference, Plaintiff requested
leave to file a third amended complaint, (ECF No. 86), which
the Court granted orally at a hearing. Plaintiff then filed
her Third Amended Complaint, adding the following as party
defendants: Nurse Demetrice Smith, Licensed Clinical Social
Worker ("LCSW") Tatjana Jerkovic, Corporal Vivian
Hudson-Parham, Lieutenant Johnathan Scott, and the John
Doe(s) responsible for removing Ms. Jenkins from medical
observation on August 1, 2014. (ECF No.92.)
29, 2016, Plaintiff filed her Motion for Sanctions against
Sheriff Woody "for intentional destruction of relevant
evidence, deliberate concealment of relevant evidence and for
deliberate non-compliance with discovery
rules." (Mot. Sanctions 1, ECF No. 112.) Plaintiff
argues that Sheriff Woody failed to preserve video camera
footage taken of Ms. Jenkins's jail cell which would show
the events "leading up to and surrounding [Ms.]
Jenkins's death." (Mem. Supp. Mot. Sanctions 2, ECF
No. 113.) Sheriff Woody filed a response opposing the
requested sanctions, (ECF No. 114), as did Deputy Beaver,
Corporal Hudson-Parham, and Lieutenant Scott, (ECF No. 116).
Because it had to assess prejudice, the Court reserved ruling
on the Motion for Sanctions until the parties presented their
arguments for summary judgment. The Court issues a separate
opinion regarding sanctions contemporaneous to this one.
November 30, 2016, upon motion by the parties, the Court
dismissed the following defendants from this action: Crissy
Royall, Aikysha Paige, Demetrice Smith, Khairul Bashar
Mohammed Emran, M.D., and Tatjana Jerkovic. On December 20,
2016, the Court held a hearing on the Joint Petition for
Approval of a Wrongful Death Settlement filed by Plaintiff
and CCS. (ECFNo. 126.) The Court approved the wrongful death
settlement between Plaintiff and CCS and dismissed CCS from
the case. (ECF No. 174.) The Court dismissed Corporal Hudson-
Parham and Lieutenant Scott on motion by the parties earlier
this month. (ECF No. 218.) Only Sheriff Woody and Deputy
Beaver remain as defendants.
following causes of action against Sheriff Woody and Deputy
Beaver, articulated in the Third Amended Complaint, remain:
"COUNT I: § 1983 Defendant Woody - Policy or Custom
of Deliberate Indifference to Serious Medical Needs Resulting
in Cruel and Unusual Punishment"
"COUNT II: § 1983 Claim Against Sheriff Woody
(Supervisory Liability) - Deliberate Indifference to Serious
Medical Needs Resulting in Cruel and Unusual Punishment"
"COUNT III: § 1983 Claim Against Jail
Staff - Deliberate Indifference to Serious
Medical Needs Resulting in Cruel and Unusual Punishment"
"COUNT VI: State Law Claims Against Defendant Sheriff
Woody and Jail Staff- Gross Negligence"
Woody moves for summary judgment on Counts I, II, and VI.
Deputy Beaver moves for summary judgment on Counts III and
VI. Plaintiff opposes summary judgment on all counts.
action involves Ms. Jenkins's death while in custody as a
pretrial detainee at the RCJC. When the RCJC opened, it was
equipped with a new video recording system that included more
than 500 cameras covering the jail, inside and out. On August
1, 2014, the night before Ms. Jenkins's death, and her
last night in the RCJC, cameras were "working and
operational" and recording properly in and around her
cell. (Witham Dep. 82, ECF No 113-2.) Sheriff
Woody testified that video surveillance in the jail serves
Well, live action that can be monitored on certain on-on-on
the pods. I can come in here and, if an incident happened
yesterday or two weeks from now, put the date, you put the
time in and you can replay the whole thing. And you can use
it for investigative purposes. You can use it for safety
purposes. You can use it for people that's-the resident
them self [sic] who lies oftenly [sic] about how something
happened and what happened before.
And so it's a-sort of a truth serum. It's
been very, very helpful to us employment-wise as well as
safety-wise and for the residents when they file grievances
and just a real live thing of what's happening,
what-what really happened.
(Woody Dep. 27, ECF No. 113-4 (emphasis added).) On August 1,
2014, four days into the RCJC's operations, Ms. Jenkins
was found in her cell incoherent, incontinent, and not
breathing. During the five hours before Ms. Jenkins was found
incoherent in her isolation cell, the RCJC's video system
recorded all activity there. Ms. Jenkins was transported from
the RCJC to VCU Medical Hospital, where she died on August 2,
Ms. Jenkins's Detention at the Richmond Citv Justice
Jenkins entered the RCJC as a pretrial detainee on July 25,
2014, three days before the RCJC's formal opening. After
CCS performed a medical screening, Ms.
Jenkins was placed on an opiate withdrawal protocol and
housed in Section 3C of the RCJC's general population.
Upon screening, Ms. Jenkins's medical presentation was
healthy. At some point on Wednesday, July 30, 2014, Ms.
Jenkins was transferred to Section 3A1, an isolation cell.
Section 3A1 is depicted variously in the record as being a
medical, mental health, or detox isolation section.
July 30, 2014; Confusion Over Ms. Jenkins's
record conflicts as to how Ms. Jenkins's transfer to
medical isolation on July 30, 2014 occurred. Deputy Priscilla
Wright, who was monitoring Ms. Jenkins's first location,
Section 3C, contacted medical. Deputy Wright testified that
she wanted to move Ms. Jenkins for Ms. Jenkins's own
protection because she was waking people up and they were
"getting a little irritated." (Wright Dep.11, ECF
No. 165-8.) Deputy Wright remembered Nurse Yukima Nuttall
helping Ms. Jenkins, but also testified that "medical
didn't want to move [Ms. Jenkins], so I had to call
Classification, Mr. Bassfield also." (Id.)
other hand, the medical personnel implicated in approving Ms.
Jenkins's transfer deny involvement. LCSW Tatjana
Jerkovic denies signing an inmate housing form requesting
medical isolation for Ms. Jenkins's mental health. Nurse
Nuttal also testified that she did not recall speaking to a
Sheriffs deputy during that time and that she does not recall
examining Jenkins and arranging for a transfer to Section 3
Al. Nurse Nutall testified that she would have made notes had
she examined Ms. Jenkins. Nurse Nutall also swore that she
could not have been involved in "doing housing
transfers" because CCS protocol prevented it. (Nutall
Dep. 23, ECF No. 165-10.) The record lacks any
contemporaneous record of Nurse Nutall evaluating Ms.Jenkins
prior to the transfer to Section 3A1.
July 30 and July 31, 2014: Ms. Jenkins's Symptoms
July 30, 2014 Logbook indicates that, at 4:09 a.m., Corporal
Vivian Hudson-Parham brought Ms. Jenkins from Section 3C to
Section 3A1 "per Nurse Nutall." (Logbook 8, ECF No.
138-8.) Deputy Beaver had responsibility for monitoring
inmates on the third floor, which included Section 3A1,
between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. At 5:28 a.m., Deputy Beaver
noticed Ms. Jenkins "talking to [her]self and using a
"pretend phone." (Logbook 10, ECF No. 138-8.) Two
nurses had contact with Jenkins during Deputy Beaver's
July 30, 2014 overnight shift: Nurse Maya Vaughn took Ms.
Jenkins's blood pressure at 9:20 p.m.; and, Nurse Daniels
checked all the third-floor inmates at 11:05 p.m.
Janet Wilkes-Gaskins relieved Deputy Beaver on Thursday, July
31, 2014, at 7:00 a.m. Deputy Wilkes-Gaskin noted at 7:46
a.m. that "[Ms.] Jenkins did not eat or drink
anything." (Logbook 13, ECF No. 138-8.) At 9:01 a.m.,
Dr. Emran ordered Ms. Jenkins's transfer from
Section 3A1 to Section 2Med. At 9:30 a.m., Dr. Emran
examined Ms. Jenkins, and in a Progress Note, noted a
"history of Percocet abuse" and
"hallucinating." (Emran Physician's Order of
Erin N. Jenkins, ECF Nos. 138-11, 147-6.) Dr. Emran further
noted the physical examination of Ms. Jenkins as
"unremarkable." (Emran Progress Note, ECF No.
138-11.) In testimony, Dr. Emran explained that Ms. Jenkins
showed no physical symptoms of withdrawal, but he saw her
talking, for a short time, to someone who was not there.
Otherwise, Ms. Jenkins appropriately responded to each
examination question. Dr. Emran testified that Ms.
Jenkins's hallucination was not consistent with
withdrawal or her medication, and that her physical exam was
normal. Dr. Emran explained that her brief hallucination
"did not make sense with her physical examination,
" so he ordered her kept for observation in Section
2Med. (Emran Dep. 90, 109, ECF No. 147-2.) Dr. Emran also
ordered the following: (1) that Ms. Jenkins's vitals be
taken each shift for the next seven days; (2) that Ms.
Jenkins receive Gatorade three times a day; and, (3) that a
psychiatrist evaluate Ms. Jenkins.
Smith remembered that Ms. Jenkins appeared
alert and responsive to questions, but also recalled Ms.
Jenkins hallucinating. Specifically, Ms. Jenkins sat up on
the bed and said, "Sit your ass down, girl." (Smith
Dep. 33, ECF No. 147-7.) After Dr. Emran asked Ms. Jenkins
who she was talking to, she said, "My daughter over
there behind the bed." (Id.) Nurse Smith
testified that Ms. Jenkins said something about her daughter
showing off, but that Ms. Jenkins then "snapped
back" and began answering questions appropriately again.
(Id.) Nurse Smith had the responsibility of carrying
out Dr. Emran's order about psychiatric evaluation, but
testified that she "did not follow up" on that
order because "all she had to do" was "make
sure they knew [Ms. Jenkins] needed a psych eval, " and
she did so. (Smith Dep. 53-54, ECF No. 138-12.) The
psychiatrist never evaluated Ms. Jenkins.
31, 2014, and into August 1, 2014, the RCJC housed Ms.
Jenkins in Section 2Med with another inmate. Deputy Dwight
Gaines was assigned to Section 2Med for the 7:00 a.m. to 7:00
p.m. shift on August 1, 2014, and was responsible for
security in the medical office. At about 4:50 p.m., Deputy
Gaines received a phone call from Ms. Jenkins's cellmate,
who stated that she had been in a fight with Ms. Jenkins.
Deputy Gaines visited the cell with Nurse Royall, who
assessed Ms. Jenkins. Absent any indication of permission or
approval from Dr. Emran, Ms. Jenkins was transferred from
Section 2Med to Section 3A1.
Lakeisha McRae, who assisted Ms. Jenkins during the transfer,
saw Ms. Jenkins sit up as if she were smoking a cigarette and
driving a car. Deputy McRae testified that Deputy Gaines was
in the room when this happened. She also testified that,
during the same interaction, Ms. Jenkins refused to put on
her shoes because bugs were on them, despite the fact that no
bugs were there. Deputy McRae acted as if she were stomping
the bugs to encourage Ms. Jenkins to get dressed so she could
be transferred. Deputy Gaines confirmed that he saw Deputy
McRae pretend to stomp the imaginary bugs "on [Ms.
Jenkins's] shoes or her jumper." (Gaines Dep. 23,
ECF No. 138-15.) McRae did not report either of these events
to the Deputy on duty in Section 3A1 when transferring Ms.
August 1, 2014: Deputy Beaver's Overnight Shift in
at 7:00 p.m. on August 1, 2014, Deputy Beaver again was
assigned to supervise the third floor of the RCJC, including
isolation cells and Section 3A1, where Ms. Jenkins was
housed. Deputy Beaver stated that when she started her shift,
she was told during pass down: "We have somebody in Cell
Number 9 back from medical, keep an eye." (March 14,
2016 Beaver Dep. ("Beaver Dep. I") 11, ECF No.
138-20.) Section 3A1 has cameras in each cell. In March
2015, Deputy Beaver testified that, as she started her shift,
she did not see Ms. Jenkins throw the food tray but presumed
she had "thrown" her food tray and not eaten
because she could see the tray under Ms. Jenkins's
bed. (Beaver Dep. 1120, ECF No. 147-1.)
Deputy Beaver testified that she did not know "what
[she] needed to look for in particular as [she]... was paying
extra attention to [Ms.] Jenkins." (Id. at
Beaver confirmed that, per the Richmond City Sheriffs Office
SOPs, she performed nine security checks, twice an hour,
between 7:00 p.m. and 10:48 p.m. In each Logbook entry,
Deputy Beaver wrote that the security check was "10/4,
" meaning that she did not see anything unusual. Only a
single entry regarding Ms. Jenkins exists in Deputy
Beaver's Logbook for those five hours: she lists Ms.
Jenkins among the roster in Cell 9 of Section 3A1. Deputy
Beaver testified that she entered multiple "10/4"s
because none of the behavior she saw Ms. Jenkins exhibit was
"unusual" for the Section 3A1 medical/mental/detox
isolation tier. (Beaver Dep. I 59, ECF No. 147-1.)
Beaver also testified to activity not documented in the
Logbooks. Deputy Beaver stated that, on August 1, 2014, she
was performing additional security checks, but explained that
she does not record security checks if she makes extra ones.
Deputy Beaver said she turned on the microphone in Ms.
Jenkins's cell, conducted security checks every thirty
minutes, and observed Ms. Jenkins by camera. Deputy Beaver
also indicated that she had voice interactions with Ms.
Jenkins several times, during which she asked Ms. Jenkins
whether she was okay.
Beaver saw Ms. Jenkins talking to herself, walking the cell
during the evening, using a toilet paper roll like a
telephone, and tearing up paper and feeding it through the
food slot, pretending to feed her absent daughter. Rather
than calling such behavior "usual, " Deputy Beaver
later testified that Ms. Jenkins was acting "like
somebody who was on a drug" and "real weird
like." (Beaver Dep. II12, ECF No. 165-24.) Deputy Beaver
confirmed that Ms. Jenkins never asked her for help; never
asked to be taken to the medical department; never asked for
medical assistance; never said she was in pain; never said
she was in discomfort; and, never reported abdominal or
stomach pain. Deputy Beaver also stated that she did not call
medical to tell them about Ms. Jenkins's
"weird" behavior because when she took over the
tier, she had been told that Ms. Jenkins had "just been
put back on there. I made the call when she peed on
herself." (Beaver Dep. II24, ECF No. 165-24.)
August 1, 2014: The Moments Immediately Preceding Ms.
10:48 p.m., Deputy Beaver performed a security check. At
approximately 10:59 p.m., Deputy Beaver observed Ms. Jenkins
from the control tower and noticed that she had been seated
on the toilet for a long time. Deputy Beaver testified that
Ms. Jenkins sat on the toilet for about ten to fifteen
minutes, but also testified that she "had sat on her
toilet for about an hour." (Beaver Dep. II 13, ECF No.
180-9.) Deputy Beaver visited Ms. Jenkins's cell to ask
if she was okay. Deputy Beaver saw that Ms. Jenkins had
urinated and asked her why her sheet was under the bed.
Deputy Beaver received a jumbled response in return. At 10:59
p.m., Deputy Beaver called Nurse Paige and, without telling
her about symptoms other than Ms. Jenkins's incontinence,
asked Nurse Paige to see Ms. Jenkins. Nurse Paige informed
Deputy Beaver that she would be there "as soon as
possible." (Richmond City Sheriffs Office Incident
Report, August 2, 2014, ECF No. 138-22.)
point either just before or just after her call to Nurse
Paige, Deputy Beaver observed Ms. Jenkins sit on the bed and
lay back. Testifying that she always inspects for
"hanging and chest movement, " (Beaver Dep. II13,
ECF No. 180-9), Deputy Beaver said she looked again and did
not see a rise and fall of Ms. Jenkins's chest. After
discovering that her radio battery did not work, Deputy
Beaver called a medical emergency by telephone. Corporal
Hudson-Parham and Lieutenant Scott then arrived at Ms.
Jenkins's cell to assist with the medical emergency.
Medical staff showed up immediately thereafter and started
CPR. Emergency medical responders eventually revived Ms.
Jenkins, and she was transported to VCU Medical Center. Ms.
Jenkins suffered a cardiac arrest. Ms. Jenkins's family
ultimately removed her from life support, and Ms. Jenkins
passed away on August 2, 2014. On October 20, 2014, Medical
Examiner Kevin D. Whaley determined the cause of Ms.
Jenkins's death to be "Acute Peritonitis Due to
Perforated Duodenal Ulcer." (Virginia Department of
Health, Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, Dr. Whaley
Report of Investigation 1, ECF No. 138-25.)
Background of the RCJC and Sheriff Woody
Woody has served as the elected Sheriff for the City of
Richmond since January 1, 2006. He holds responsibility for
the operation of the RCJC, which formally opened on July 28,
2014. The RCJC is an air-conditioned correctional facility
designed to provide for direct supervision of inmates by
staff. The RCJC includes a medical housing unit intended to
provide onsite care to inmates. Inmates requiring additional
observation may be placed in an isolated medical unit
equipped with cameras and microphones. SOP 249 provides that
only the Chief Physician or a designee may place residents in
the facility's medical and mental health tier.
independent medical contractor provides all inmate healthcare
services at the RCJC, including medical and mental health
services. When the RCJC opened in July 2014, Sheriff Woody
contracted with CCS to provide healthcare services. CCS
employed Dr. Emran as the licensed physician responsible for
supervising the RCJC's healthcare services.
Department of Corrections Audits
Department of Corrections (the "DOC") did not audit
the RCJC in 2014 because of the move to the new facility,
which DOC had approved. On March 26 and 27, 2013, the DOC
conducted an annual jail inspection of the former Richmond
City Jail. The audit found the former Richmond City Jail 99%
compliant with all Life, Health, and Safety Standards.
Specifically, the audit determined that the RCJC: (1)
provided inmate access to medical services; (2) required
First Aid and CPR certification for security staff; and, (3)
performed random twice-per-hour security checks and
documented inspections and unusual incidents.
November 9 and 10, 2015, the DOC conducted its first audit of
the RCJC. The DOC found the RCJC 100% compliant with all
standards. The 2015 audit, unlike the one in 2013, left blank
the number of deaths that occurred in the RCJC.
Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services
Virginia law, the Department of Criminal Justice Services
(the "DCJS") has the power to "[e]stablish
minimum entry-level, in-service, and advanced training
standards for persons employed as deputy sheriffs and jail
officers by local criminal justice agencies." Va. Code
§ 9.1-102(9). The DCJS mandates 400 hours of Compulsory
Minimum Training and 100 hours of field training for
certification. 6 VAC 20-20-21.
DCJS's training for jail officers includes training on
rounds, patrols, inspections, security checks, logbooks,
observing inmates, preventive patrol techniques, unusual
odors and sounds, head counts, and intake and screening. 6
VAC 20-20-50. The DCJS requires deputies to comply with the
training standards within twelve months of appointment. 6 VAC
20-50-40. Newly appointed deputies who have not yet attended
basic training receive two weeks of "On the Job"
training. (Allmon Aff. ¶ 8, ECF No. 138-30.)
basic, field, and "On the Job" training includes
training on how to perform security checks. SOP 202 requires
twice-hourly security checks on inmates. Deputies learn to
observe each inmate and to check for unusual behavior or
signs of illness or injury. SOP 202 requires that deputies,
during security checks, look for sickness, injury, assaults,
suicides or attempted suicides, and odd or
"inappropriate behavior denoting possible mental
disorders." (Richmond City Sheriffs Office SOP 202, ECF
No. 138-7.) However, nothing in this record lists any
training to on how identify "inappropriate behavior
denoting possible mental disorders."
suicidal, and emergent events do appear to be taught. For
example, if an inmate appears to be sleeping, deputies are
trained to observe the rise and fall of the chest and to look
for other bodily movements. If no movement is observed,
deputies are trained to make verbal contact or other audio
techniques. If an inmate remains unresponsive, deputies are
trained to seek medical assistance by giving a
"10-18" signal, indicating a medical emergency.
Deputies also receive annual First Aid/CPR/AED
point prior to the opening of the RCJC, all deputies were
provided access to policy handbooks for the new facility,
which the deputies were expected to study and learn. The
deputies also took tours and received on-site training for
supervision of all inmate populations, including training on
proper responses to medical and safety incidents. However,
while the attached PowerPoint presentation of that training
includes some "slides" on how to respond to medical
emergencies, it includes no training, or mention, of
observing an inmate's mental health during observation or
rounds. Nor does it specify what might be a "noteworthy
event or incident" that it suggests would be worth
recording in a "Log Book." (City of Richmond
Justice Center Pod Familiarization Training, ECF No. 138-36.)
Regarding her own RCJC training, Deputy Beaver confirmed only
that she was taken to a computer and shown how to use the
video observation system, including manipulating the cameras
by zooming in and out, and turning the audio system on and
off. The record is bereft of any other training Deputy Beaver
3A1, where Deputy Beaver worked and Ms. Jenkins was housed,
is described at various places throughout the record as a
medical, mental health, or detox isolation unit. For
instance, Colonel Burnett testified that Section 3A1 is a
medical or mental health pod "where they may deem that
you may have mental health issues which would require you to
be locked in more closely" with individual cells and
cameras in each cell. (Burnett Dep. 84, ECF No. 165-2;
see also Royall Dep. 76, ECF No. 138-17 (describing
3A1 and as mental health and detox observation area).)
However, the record indicates that the deputies assigned to
Section 3A1 did not receive any special training and, like
other deputies, they never received instruction on proper
observation to know when to report to medical staff inmates
who are experiencing symptoms that could be caused by either
a psychological or physiological condition.
citing Lieutenant Colonel Allmon as the expert on training,
Sheriff Woody testified that he did not know what kind of
training the Sherriff Office's employees would receive
"with respect to the recognition of issues that need to
be sent to medical for evaluation." (Woody Dep. 64, ECF
No. 165-3.) According to Colonel Burnett, any deputy can be
placed in Section 3A1, and all deputies are trained "the
same way"; deputies receive no different training or
require specific qualifications to serve on a mental health,
medical tier. (Burnett Dep. 30, ECF No. 165-2.) Deputy Beaver
testified that Section 3A2 houses inmates in isolation for
discipline issues and that deputies do nothing different when
observing the two sides. Lieutenant Scott, without citing a
SOP or other training document, confirmed that, on Section
3A1, talking to someone "who is not there" would
not be unusual and that a deputy need not report such
behavior to medical unless an inmate is a hazard to herself
or the cell. (Scott Dep. 78-79, ECF No. 147-2.) Deputy Beaver
testified that Ms. Jenkins's behavior on August 1, 2014,
was not unusual for Section 3A1, but that she did not know
"what [she] needed to look for in particular as [she]...
was paying extra attention to [Ms.] Jenkins."
(Id. at 25-26.) Also without identifying a policy,
Lieutenant Scott indicated that if someone were hallucinating
for five to ten minutes, he might call medical personnel.
CCS offered, Sheriff Woody declined to have CCS "educate
security staff on pertinent medical issues, " including:
"Emergency response"; "Symptom
recognition"; "Treatment recognition";
"Recognizing signs and symptoms of mental illness";
"Urgent and emergent medical conditions"; and
"Signs and symptoms of chemical dependency." (CCS
Proposed Jail Staff Training Program, ECF No. 165-4; see
also Sheriff Woody Dep. 66, ECF No.165-3.) Sheriff Woody
testified that he did not want medical people to train his
guards because "the medical people [are] the
experts." (Woody Dep. 66, ECF No. 165-3.)
Sheriff Woody said: "We have a standard that is required
by the Department of Criminal Justice Services. And as long
as we are meeting that standard and passing it on a yearly
basis, that's all we're required to do."
Analysis: Motions for Summary Judgment
Summary Judgment Standard
judgment under Rule 56 is appropriate only when the Court,
viewing the record as a whole and in the light most favorable
to the nonmoving party, determines that there exists no
genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Celotex
Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-24 (1986);
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242,
248-50 (1986). "A fact is material if the existence or
non-existence thereof could lead a jury to different
resolutions of the case." Thomas v. FTS USA,
LLC, No. 3:13cv825, 2016 WL3653878, *4 (E.D. Va. June
30, 2016) (citing Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. at 248).
Once a party has properly filed evidence supporting the
motion for summary judgment, the nonmoving party may not rest
upon mere allegations in the pleadings, but instead must set
forth specific facts illustrating genuine issues for trial.
Celotex Corp., 477 U.S. at 322-24. These facts must
be presented in the form of exhibits and sworn affidavits.
views the evidence and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom
in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.
Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. at 255. Whether an inference
is reasonable must be considered in conjunction with
competing inferences to the contrary. Sylvia Dev. Corp.
v. Calvert Cty., 48 F.3d 810, 818 (4th Cir. 1995).
Nonetheless, the nonmoving "party is entitled 'to
have the credibility of his evidence as forecast
assumed.'" Miller v. Leathers, 913 F.2d
1085, 1087 (4th Cir. 1990) (en banc) (quoting
Charbonnages de France v. Smith, 597 F.2d 406, 414
(4th Cir. 1979)). Ultimately, the court must adhere to the
affirmative obligation to bar factually unsupportable claims
from proceeding to trial. Felty v. Graves-Humphreys
Co., 818 F.2d 1126, 1128 (4th Cir. 1987) (citing Celotex
Corp., 477 U.S. at 323-24). The ultimate inquiry in
examining a motion for summary judgment is whether there is
"sufficient evidence favoring the nonmoving party for a
jury to return a verdict for that party. If the evidence is
merely colorable, or is not significantly probative, summary
judgment may be granted." Liberty Lobby, 477
U.S. at 249-50.
Sheriff Woodv's Motion for Summary Judgment
Woody moves for summary judgment on three counts: "Count
I: § 1983 Defendant Woody - Policy or Custom of
Deliberate Indifference to Serious Medical Needs Resulting in
Cruel and Unusual Punishment"; "Count II: §
1983 Claim Against Sheriff Woody (Supervisory Liability) -
Deliberate Indifference to Serious Medical Needs Resulting in
Cruel and Unusual Punishment"; and, "Count VI:
State Law Claims Against Defendant Sheriff Woody and Jail
Staff- Gross Negligence." For the reasons that follow,
the Court will deny Sheriff Woody's Motion for Summary
Judgment as to Counts I and IV and grant Sheriff Woody's
Motion for Summary Judgment as to Count II.
Section 1983 Liability ...