Sign Up for Vincent AI
Bennett v. Carter Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs
This case arises out of Michael Manos's arrest, conviction and subsequent treatment at the Carter County Jail in Ardmore, Oklahoma. Mr. Manos is deceased, so the Plaintiff is his mother Jeanne Bennet, who is also the administrator of his estate. The Plaintiff sued a number of individuals and entities, including the remaining Defendants in the case, Chris Bryant, in his official capacity as the Sheriff of Carter County, Oklahoma; Milton Anthony, former sheriff, in his individual capacity; and deputies Josh Adams and Brantley Maxson, in their individual capacities. The claims against these Defendants are made pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and all have filed summary judgment motions. In accordance with its decisions announced on March 29, 2019, see Docket No. 240, the Court issues this opinion setting forth its reasons for: (i) granting the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant, Deputy Brantley Maxson [Docket No. 172], the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant Milton Anthony and Brief in Support [Docket No. 194] and Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant Josh Adams and Brief in Support [Docket No. 195]; and, (ii) denying Defendant Sheriff Chris Bryant's Motion and Brief for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 182].
The Plaintiff filed this case on July 25, 2017, in this Court. In her Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff alleged three causes of action against the various Defendants, but only the first and second implicate these four defendants.1 The Plaintiff's First Claim for Relief is raised pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as to all four Defendants, alleging violations of the constitutional right to medical care and mental health care as to Defendants Adams and Maxson, and based on a policy or custom, as well as failure to train and failure to supervise as to Defendant Former Sheriff Anthony in his individual capacity and Defendant Sheriff Bryant in his official capacity. The Second Claim for Relief is raised pursuant to § 1983 as to Defendants Adams and Maxson, alleging violations of the constitutional right to humane conditions of confinement.
Summary judgment is appropriate if the record shows that "there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). A genuine issue of material fact exists when "there is sufficientevidence favoring the nonmoving party for a jury to return a verdict for that party." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249 (1986). The moving party must show the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, see Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 325 (1986), with the evidence taken in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157 (1970). However, "a party asserting that a fact cannot be or is genuinely disputed must support the assertion by . . . citing to particular parts of materials in the record . . . or . . . showing that the materials cited do not establish the absence or presence of a genuine dispute[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).
The undisputed facts2 reflect that beginning October 22, 2015, Manos was at the Carter County Jail serving a four-month sentence for assault and battery. When Anthony became sheriff, a policy and procedure manual was already in place, and he delegated training to Jail Administrator Michael Armstrong. Armstrong has no recollection of providing these policies to Jail staff from 2013 through 2015. Jail policy at all relevant times stated that medical care was to be delivered by a licensed physician and through the use of trained health care personnel. See Docket No. 183, Ex. 1 at p. 4. Likewise, all detention officers were to be trained in emergency first aid and cardiopulmonaryresuscitation ("CPR") with updated yearly training. Id. However, Carter County Jail had no licensed physician on staff, and instead had hired licensed registered nurse Kim Miller. She did not regularly review medication logs, although she had access to the logs and the Jail Entry Log.
Manos had a history of mental illness, and upon his intake that day, a Medical Questionnaire indicated that he had high blood pressure and bipolar disorder. See Docket No. 183, Ex. 2. Furthermore, there were boxes checked indicating that he was currently under medical treatment and that he was currently taking medication prescribed by a doctor, but there were no further details on these two points because the "Explanation" section listed "n/a." Id. It is undisputed that Manos was prescribed a number of medications for impairments including high blood pressure, diabetes, and bipolar disorder. Upon his incarceration, the Plaintiff provided those medications to the jail.
Although there is some dispute about whether the jail would accept medications that had been opened, it appears the jail did accept at least some of Manos' medications because there is a medication log beginning October 22, 2015 for seven different medications. See Docket No. 183, Ex. 3. The Plaintiff challenges the veracity of these logs, asserting that there were discrepancies regarding pill count, and that logs were filled out prior to handing out medications to inmates. However, jailers testified that it was their process to fill out the logs, then have inmates initial or note "pass" when medications were accepted for refused. Based on the logs, Manos was fairly consistent in accepting his medications forthe first few days, but began passing on some or all of them beginning October 28, 2015. He also began refusing some or all of his meals, beginning October 30, 2015.
On October 27, 2015, Manos was moved to a holding cell following tensions with other inmates. The Carter County Jail policy for holding cells is that a deputy was required to observe each holding cell once per hour, or once every fifteen minutes if the inmate was suicidal or in need of medical observation. See Docket No. 183, Ex. 1, p. 1. Later that morning of October 27, jail staff moved Manos to cell A104, a medical cell where he was housed until November 7. The Carter County Jail has no separate specific policy for observance related to medical cells, but the general Jail policy requires documented hourly sight checks, as well as sight checks at least every half hour for inmates who were mentally or emotionally disturbed, identified as escape or suicide risks, or housed in disciplinary isolation. Id. at p. 3. The cells are under video surveillance, but that video footage was not preserved and is not part of the record in this case.
On October 29, 2015, Manos smeared feces on himself and his cell, and had to be forcibly removed and showered. Defendant Adams testified that, around this time, he saw Manos laying in his feces, that he had informed Nurse Miller and Jail Administrator Michael Armstrong about Manos' behavior, and that he had been told they were working on it. On November 3, 2015, Jail Administrator Armstrong called an ambulance for Manos because he had been eating his own feces, and apparently smeared feces on himself and his cell. When EMTs arrived, Manos was naked and handcuffed on the floor of the dayroom at the jail, because his cell had been flooded and water was coming from the toilet. The Prehospital Care Report states that jailers reported to the EMTs that Manos had not eatenfor five days (except for his own feces), and had also not had insulin for five days, and that he was "acting crazy." Docket No. 183, Ex. 6. Neither Maxson nor Adams was present for this event. The EMTs twice checked Manos' blood sugar, which was normal, and did not transport him to the ER. The report states, "carter co decided pt was faking his craziness and decided not to transport, but clean him up and keep him instead." Id. Deputy Johnny Denny signed a Refusal of Service for Manos. See Docket No. 183, Ex. 4.
After the EMTs left, Manos was taken to the showers and had to be assisted to get his backside clean, and was then returned to his cell, which had also been cleaned. Manos continued to refuse most, but not all, food and medications. On November 6, 2015, Judge Thomas Baldwin of the District Court of Carter County issued an order releasing Manos upon time served, with the stipulation that he only be released to his mother (the Plaintiff herein) and a friend, Michael Crawford, on the condition that she transport him to the Veteran's Administration Facility in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. See Docket No. 182, Ex. 27. The Plaintiff has testified that she planned to pick him up on Sunday, November 8, 2015.
On November 7, 2015, around 4:30 p.m., Adams and Maxson were conducting a sight check and noted Manos lying on the ground, growling and mumbling to himself. An hour later, Maxson returned to dispense medications and asked Manos four times if he wanted to take his medications. On the fourth time, Manos replied, "No." Around 6:00 p.m., Maxson was passing out meal trays and Manos refused the dinner tray. He still had his uneaten lunch tray, which Maxson left in case Manos wanted it later. Adams picked up the meal trays, but left Manos' lunch tray after Manos said he would eat it "in a minute."Around 8:50 p.m., Adams was passing out commissary, observed Manos lying on the floor close to the door, and asked Manos if he had eaten yet, to which Manos replied, "Not yet."
At 10:01 p.m., Maxson entered Manos's cell to ask if he wanted his medications, but could not get a verbal response from him even after tapping Manos' foot with his shoe. Maxson saw Manos' chest rise a few times,...
Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI
Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting