Jenkins v. Hayman

RASOOL JENKINS, Plaintiff,

v.GEORGE W. HAYMAN, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No.: 09-4989 (MAS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Dated: June 24, 2013

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

OPINION

APPEARANCES:

RASOOL JENKINS, Plaintiff pro se

JUSTIN L. CONFORTI, ESQ.

OFFICE OF THE N.J. ATTORNEY GENERAL

Department of Law

R.J. Hughes Justice Complex

Counsel for Defendants Hayman, McGovern, Warren, Hundt, Mikus, Myers, Errickson,

Pruszinski, Conrey, Wernik, Labonne, Weinstein, Manera and Headley

SHIPP, District Judge

This matter is before the Court pursuant to a motion for summary judgment (Docket entry no. 81) filed on behalf of the named Defendants in this action. Plaintiff has not filed any opposition to Defendants' motion at this time. This motion will be decided on the papers, without oral argument, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78. For the reasons set forth below,Defendants' motion for summary judgment will be granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, Defendant's motion for summary judgment will be granted in favor of all defendants on claims asserted against them in their official capacities. Defendants also are entitled to summary judgment with respect to Plaintiff's retaliation claim. Further, Defendants Headley and Flickinger are entitled to summary judgment on the denial of medical care claim; Defendants Wernik and Errickson are entitled to summary judgment on the failure to protect claim; and Defendant Hayman will be granted summary judgment based on supervisor liability. Defendants' motion for summary judgment will be denied, however, with respect to the excessive force and failure to intervene claims as asserted by Plaintiff against Defendants Myers, Weinstein, Hundt, Labonne, Manera, Pruszinski, Conrey, and Mikus.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

On or about September 30, 2009, Plaintiff, Rasool Jenkins, filed this civil rights Complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against the following defendants: George Hayman, Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Corrections ("NJDOC"); Charles Warren, Administrator of Southern State Correctional Facility ("SSCF"); SSCF Special Investigation Division ("SID"); James McGovern, NJDOC Administrative Hearing Officer; State Correctional Officer ("SCO") Meyers; Sgt. Errickson; SCO Weinstein; SCO Hundt; SCO Wernik; SCO Labonne; SCO Manera; SCO Pruszinski; SCO Conrey; Sgt. Mikus; Nurse Headley, RN, Medical Department; John/Jane Does (Medical Personnel); and John/Jane Does (Custody Personnel). (Dkt. # 1, Complaint, Caption and ¶¶ 21-51). In his Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that, on July 9, 2008, while he was confined at SSCF, he was physically assaulted by several Defendant officers during apat down search, in retaliation for Plaintiff's purported involvement in a prior incident at SSCF in 2005, in which Plaintiff allegedly threatened a SSCF officer. Plaintiff further alleges that he was charged with false disciplinary infractions to whitewash the assault by the correctional officers. Plaintiff also alleges that he was denied proper medical care for his injuries after the physical assault. (Dkt. # 1.)

In an Opinion and Order, entered on May 6, 2010 (Dkt. ## 5, 6), the Honorable Freda L. Wolfson, U.S.D.J., dismissed the claims of false disciplinary charges and denial of disciplinary due process as asserted against all named Defendants, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 1915A(b)(l), for failure to state a claim. Judge Wolfson allowed Plaintiff's claims to proceed in which he asserted Eighth Amendment violations of use of excessive force, failure to protect and denial of medical care, as well as Plaintiff's retaliation claim. (Dkt. # 5.)

On March 31, 2011, an Answer was filed on behalf of the Defendants. (Dkt. # 49.) Plaintiff's deposition was taken on March 20, 2012. Discovery concluded on or about March 26, 2012. In an Order entered on April 18, 2012, the Honorable Lois H. Goodman, U.S.M.J., denied Plaintiff's request for an extension of fact discovery and for production of unredacted documents. (Dkt. # 72.) The case was re-assigned to the undersigned on July 30, 2012. (Dkt. # 79.) One month later, on August 31, 2012, Judge Goodman denied Plaintiff's renewed requests for unredacted documents concerning 2005 reports, including informant identities. (Dkt. # 80.) Judge Goodman also denied Plaintiff's request for the disciplinary records of Defendants Warren and Pruszinski, and denied Plaintiff's request to extend fact discovery. Judge Goodman did permit Plaintiff's request for depositions of Defendants, the costs and arrangements to be borne by Plaintiff, or alternatively, depositions by written questions, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 31, but thesedepositions were limited so that Plaintiff could not probe areas already designated as confidential, nor could Plaintiff pursue questioning in other areas that had been denied previously. (Dkt. # 80.)

On November 21, 2012, Defendants filed this motion for judgment on the pleadings, or alternatively, for summary judgment. (Dkt. #81.) Plaintiff has not responded to Defendants' motion.

B. Statement of Facts

The following facts are derived from the Defendants' Statement of Material Facts, submitted with their motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). Plaintiff has not responded to the Defendants' motion, and therefore, has not submitted a statement of material facts in dispute.

On July 9, 2008, Plaintiff was a state inmate confined at SSCF. (Declaration of Brenda A. Hutton ("Hutton Deck"), Exhibit A, DOC JENKINS 266.) The named Defendants Myers, Hundt, Pruszinski, Conrey, Wernik, Labonne, Weinstein and Manera were senior correctional officers ("SCO"), who were assigned to work at SSCF on July 9, 2008. Defendants Mikus and Erickson were sergeants also assigned to work at SSCF on July 9, 2008. Defendant Headley was a nurse employed by Correctional Medical Services ("CMS"), who was assigned to work at SSCF on July 9, 2008. (Declaration of Salvatore Leto ("Leto Deck"), Ex. A.)

On July 9, 2008, at about 5:15 p.m., Myers was clearing the D-Wing in Unit 2 at SSCF when he observed Plaintiff hide something in a footlocker. Myers instructed Plaintiff to stop and submit to a pat frisk. While the frisk was being conducted, Myers saw Plaintiff toss something to the ground. When Myers questioned Plaintiff about the tossed item, Plaintiff struck Myers in thehead with his elbow. (Declaration of Jeffrey Beebe ("Beebe Deck"), Ex. A, DOC JENKINS 159.)

SCO Hundt, who had been standing at the end of D-Wing in Unit 2 before the incident occurred, saw Plaintiff strike Myers in the head and went to assist Myers in restraining Plaintiff. Plaintiff physically resisted the attempt to restrain him, and a scuffle ensued, which resulted in a Code 33 being called. (Id., DOC JENKINS 172.) SCOs Pruszinski, Conrey, Weinstein, Labonne and Manera, and Sgt. Mikus responded to the Code 33 to assist Myers and Hundt in subduing Plaintiff. (Id., DOC JENKINS 179.)

Sgt. Mikus reported that, when he arrived on the scene, Plaintiff was on the floor resisting the attempt of several SCOs to restrain him. Mikus further reported that Plaintiff became "combative" and pulled his arms away from the officers when they tried to handcuff Plaintiff. (Id.) Mikus stated that "every chance [the officers] had to de-escalate the level of force required to contain the situation, [Plaintiff] would begin flailing around with his arms and legs," including an attempt to wrap his legs around the bottom bunk to gain leverage against the officers. (Id.)

In the post-incident reports completed by the officers who had responded to the Code 33, all officers stated that Plaintiff was "combative" throughout the effort to restrain him by disobeying verbal orders and by kicking the officers who tried to handcuff Plaintiff. (Id., DOC JENKINS 172, DOC JENKINS 173, DOC JENKINS 175, DOC JENKINS 177.) SCO Pruszinski reported that it "took a lot of time [to handcuff Plaintiff] due to the amount of resistance" from him. However, once he was handcuffed, the officers were able to get Plaintiff to his feet. (Id., DOC JENKINS 173.)

Sgt. Mikus reported that Plaintiff continued to resist and was uncooperative as he was being escorted from the area of the incident. Specifically, Mikus stated that "each time his feet touched the floor [Plaintiff] attempted to push the escorting officers around the wing into the walls." (Id., DOC JENKINS 179.) Plaintiff also kicked off the floor and walls near the unit door as they were exiting the unit so as to cause the escorting officers to stumble. Consequently, the officers secured Plaintiff's legs and placed him in a "lock-up" cart to be removed from the unit courtyard. (Id.)

Defendants Myers, Hundt and Pruszinski were examined by Nurse Bender on July 10, 2008. Nurse Bender reported that Myers had "mild swelling to the area" of his forehead where he was elbowed by Plaintiff. (Id., DOC JENKINS 199.) Hundt had a contusion to his scalp, and Pruszinski suffered a bruise on his scalp and contusions to his upper right arm and shoulder blade. (Id., DOC JENKINS 205, 206.)

Immediately after the altercation, Plaintiff was taken to a detention holding cell. Nurse Sweeney tried to evaluate Plaintiff for injuries, but could not get a visual assessment because Plaintiff continued to demonstrate "violent behavior." (Id., DOC JENKINS 536.) Later, at about 8:00 p.m., Plaintiff was transferred to a second, larger holding cell without incident. (Id., DOC JENKINS 183, 167.)

Defendant Headley then went to Plaintiff's second holding cell to examine him. She observed swelling to his head, a three to four inch laceration to the top of his scalp, and swelling and bruising to Plaintiff's left eye. Headley also lifted up Plaintiff's T-shirt and saw a small circular abrasion on his left shoulder. Headley's observations were noted in Plaintiff's electronic medical record ("EMR"). (Id., DOC JENKINS 167.)

In a post-incident report, Headley noted that Plainti...