Porter v. Cape Girardeau Cnty.

1

EASTE ANTHONY PORTER, Plaintiff, v. CAPE GIRARDEAU COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

No. 1:18-cv-00139-SEP

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division

March 31, 2022

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SARAH E. PITLYK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Before the Court is Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. Doc. [84]. The Motion is fully briefed and ripe for review. For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is granted.

Facts and background

Plaintiff Anthony Porter initiated this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on June 6, 2018. Doc. [1]. At all times relevant to the motion, Porter was incarcerated as a pretrial detainee at the Cape Girardeau County Jail, where the individual Defendants were employed. On March 19, 2020, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, naming Cape Girardeau County as a Defendant, as well as three individuals: Todd Stevens, a Lieutenant at the Jail, and William Crites and Phillip Colyer, both of whom were Correctional Officers at the Jail. Doc. [74]. Count I alleges that Defendant Stevens used excessive force against Porter on June 12, 2017, while Defendant Crites failed to intervene. Count II alleges that Defendant Crites used excessive force against Porter, in a separate incident, also on June 12, 2017. Count III alleges that Defendant Colyer used excessive force against him on October 28, 2017. Count IV alleges that Defendant Stevens violated his right to adequate nutrition on June 12, 2017. Finally, in Count V Plaintiff alleges that Cape Girardeau County inadequately trains its employees and has unofficial customs and practices that support the use of excessive force and inadequate nutrition.

Viewing the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to Plaintiff for purposes of the Motion before the Court, the record establishes the following:

Plaintiff was incarcerated in the Cape Girardeau County Jail from June 5, 2017, through December 28, 2017. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 1. Plaintiff was 24 years old at the time of his admission to the Jail, had been diagnosed with an aggression disorder, had a known history of aggressive behavior, ^[1] and described himself as “real rambunctious.” Doc. [85-9] at 1; [Doc. 88-1] at 20. Additionally, Defendant Stevens is approximately 5'5” or 5'6”, while Porter is six feet tall. Doc. [88] at 28.

On June 12, 2017, at approximately 1:30 p.m., Porter complained to Defendant Stevens that his food tray had been shorted, as he had been given three tortillas, some bologna, and a side of corn, but he was missing a slot of beans. Doc. [88] ¶¶ 1-3. In response to Plaintiff's complaint Stevens stated that Plaintiff would not receive more food and directed him back to his bunk. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 3. Porter continued to complain that his food tray was inadequate and then walked back to his bunk area under the nearby staircase and sat down with his back against the wall. Id. ¶ 4. Stevens then told Porter to go into the cell behind him. Doc. [88] ¶ 20. Plaintiff resisted this instruction, insisting that he would not go into the designated cell because there was already an inmate in there on the bottom bunk, and Plaintiff alleged that he needed the bottom bunk due to a seizure disorder. Doc. [85-2] at 35. Porter told Stevens that he would “not go[ ] in that room” until Stevens moved the other inmate. Id. Stevens advised Porter that if he did not go into the cell, he would be refusing an order, but Stevens continued to resist. Doc. [88] ¶ 23-24.^[2] Stevens then warned Porter a second time that he was being ordered to go into the cell, and that if Porter did not “get back in that room” he was going to be tased. Id. ¶ 24; Doc. [85-2] at 35. Porter did not go in the cell and Stevens then unholstered his taser and tased Porter in the chest.^[3] Doc. [95-1] ¶ 12. Stevens then came behind Porter and placed him in a headlock, causing Porter to state, “I ain't doing nothing.” Id. ¶¶ 14-15. Defendant Crites, who was present during the foregoing incident, proceeded to handcuff Porter. Id. ¶¶ 16-17. Stevens then used the taser to “dry stun”^[4] Porter in the back. Porter testified that one prong of the taser skimmed his finger and two prongs of the taser locked into his chest, but the record is unclear as to whether Plaintiff is asserting that he was tased yet again, or whether this is alleged to have occurred during one of the prior tasings. Doc. [95-1] ¶¶ 19-21. As the Court construes the facts in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, it will assume he was tased three times during this incident. Plaintiff testified that after the tasing he had marks on his chest, that he has experienced soreness, stiffness, constriction in his chest and back, and twitching, and he expects to have future medical needs related to the same. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 23-25. Following the above-described incident, Porter was placed in administrative segregation for a few hours. Doc. [88] ¶ 34.

Later that same day, after being released from segregation, Porter became involved in a physical altercation with two other inmates. Doc. [88] ¶ 35. Porter asked one of the other inmates to give him his mattress. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 35. The two other inmates attacked Porter, and Porter punched both of the other detainees. Id. at 36; Doc. [88] ¶ 36. Defendant Crites entered the pod, witnessed the fight, and grabbed Porter and slammed him onto a table. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 37. Crites, believing that Porter had assaulted the other two inmates, removed Porter from the pod. Doc. [88] ¶ 41. As Crites and Porter walked away from the pod towards the old visiting area, Porter kept turning around in an attempt to talk to Crites, hoping to explain that the other detainees had attacked him first. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 39. Crites ordered Porter to stop turning around and to stop resisting. Doc. [88] ¶ 39. As Porter and Crites approached a glass door leading to the old visiting area, Crites again told Porter to stop turning around and resisting, and then pushed Porter's face against the visitation door in order to hold him still. Id. ¶ 40; Doc. [88] ¶ 42. Porter testified that being pushed against the door caused one of his teeth to be chipped and his mouth to bleed. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 41-42. Defendants assert that his chipped tooth and bleeding were the result of Porter's altercation with the two other detainees moments before. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 41-42. No. one disputes that Crites pushed Porter against the door following the fight with the other detainees, however, and whether that incident definitively caused the chipped tooth or not is immaterial to the Court's analysis. After being pushed against the door, Porter again explained that he was attacked by the other two detainees and asked the staff to review the camera footage. Id. ¶ 46. It was determined that he did not initiate the fight, and Porter was removed from the visiting area and placed in a different pod. Id. ¶ 47.

The incident involved in Count III occurred some months later, on October 28, 2017. On that day, Plaintiff received a piece of meat in one his meals that he alleged was undercooked. Doc. [88] ¶ 43. Porter complained about the meat to a corrections officer, who asked Porter to come out of his pod to discuss it, and then went to inform the kitchen. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 48-49. Porter then walked out his pod carrying the meat. Id. Another corrections officer, Officer Golden, did not know that Porter had been asked to exit the pod, and believed that Porter had exited the pod without permission. Id. ¶ 50. Golden believed that Porter was “trying to escape or something, ” and attempted to grab Porter's arm to handcuff him. Doc. [88] ¶¶ 45-46. Defendant Colyer witnessed this interaction from the observation bubble and came to assist, as he believed that Porter was refusing an order from Golden. Doc. [88] ¶ 47. Golden told Porter that he was taking him to booking for exiting the pod without permission. Id. ¶ 48. As Golden and Porter were walking to booking, Porter leaned back to speak to Golden about where he was being taken. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 54. Seeing this interaction, Colyer grabbed Porter and told him to stop resisting Golden. Doc. [88] ¶ 50. Colyer then twice directed Porter to stop resisting, indicating that if he continued to struggle, Colyer would tase him. Id. ¶ 51. Colyer then slammed Porter to the ground, unholstered his taser, and tased Porter. Id. ¶ 52.

The Count IV incident happened when Porter complained to Defendant Stevens about his shortened food tray. As background, Plaintiff alleges that he needs a special high-calorie diet that requires him to have a certain number of calories or he will start losing weight. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 64. Plaintiff asserts that he requires anywhere from 4, 000 to 6, 000 calories per day, or approximately double the number of calories an average person needs.^[5] Id. ¶¶ 70. Plaintiff informed the Jail of this purported need for extra calories per day, and Defendant Stevens was aware of Plaintiff's allegations regarding his need for a special diet. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 65, ¶ 74. However, Porter did not provide the Jail with any medical diagnosis or medical confirmation of his need for a special diet, and there is no evidence in the record of his need for extra calories, other than Plaintiff's assertion of the same.

On June 12, 2017, Plaintiff complained to Defendant Stevens that his food tray was shorted, and requested side dishes to supplement his main dish in order to accommodate his special high calorie diet. Doc. [88], at 13 ¶ 2. Stevens told Porter that he would not receive extra food, and directed him back to his bunk. Id. ¶ 3. Porter showed Stevens his food tray through the window, so that Stevens could see that he did not have enough food. Doc. [95-1] ¶ 67. Stevens told Porter that if the tray was missing food, that was “probably not how it came in there.” Id. ¶ 68. ...