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.

Hayes v. Woods

United States District Court, Fifth Circuit

November 1, 2013

BERNARD HAYES, #356161, Plaintiff,
v.
RICKY WOODS; MATTHEW GARRIGA; and KAREN JOHNSON, Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

JOHN M. ROPER, Jr., Magistrate Judge.

This matter comes before this Court on the Defendants' Motion [40] for summary judgment for summary judgment filed in this case. Also pending before the Court are the defendants' motions to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution [43], or in the alternative, to show cause and for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery [44] and Supplement Summary Judgment motion, if necessary. Bernard Hayes [Hayes] has a Motion for Subpoenas [45] pending. The Court, being fully advised in the premises, and after carefully considering the pleadings filed as a matter of record, along with the applicable law, finds as follows.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Bernard Hayes [Hayes] filed this pro se Complaint on July 5, 2012, alleging violations of his civil rights, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983, while incarcerated in the Harrison County Adult Detention Center [HCADC] during May 2012. [1.] Specifically, Hayes, a pretrial detainee at the time of his alleged injury, advances claims of a violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, and deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. [1, p. 6.]

Hayes contends that he was "isolated in the hole" until further notice, and that he received no response to his grievance filed in connection with this incident. [1, p. 3.] He contends that he has migraine headaches "from my head slapping the wall" and that he was left for 2-3 days without medical attention. [1, p. 5.] He claims that while in handcuffs, Ricky Woods [Woods], Matthew Garriga [Garriga] and Zachary McCabe [McCabe] held him against the wall, while Woods allegedly had his hand around Hayes' neck, choking him. [1, p. 6.] When Hayes tried to move, "my head was pushed hard to the wall, not once but twice causing serious bodily injury." ( Id. ) He states that he was then placed in lock down until further notice. ( Id. ) He was examined by Rachael Betts, the LPN on duty, and allegedly was told he was fine. ( Id. )

Hayes was housed in Block B, B-Section at the HCADC in cell 211, and on May 3, 2012, Woods was escorting an inmate[1] to his new cell assignment, which was cell 211. [40-3, p. 1.] Woods avers that Hayes came out of his cell when the door opened, and would not return to the cell, in spite of being asked to reenter his cell. [40-3, pp. 1-2.] Garriga and Woods both advised Hayes to pack his belongings to be move to the disciplinary section of Block B, but Hayes allegedly refused to obey these requests. [40-3, p. 1.] When Hayes became argumentative, Woods asked Hayes to turn around and "cuff up." [40-3, pp. 1-2.] Woods states that Hayes became aggressive when they entered the sally-port, balling up his fist and gritting his teeth. [40-3, p. 2.] Woods asked Hayes to turn around, and when he began to pull away Woods and McCabe forced Hayes against the wall to restrain him while Garriga handcuffed him. ( Id. ) Woods, Garriga and six other officers assisted in escorting Hayes to cell #130. ( Id. ) Woods included a copy of his narrative report of the incident. [40-3, p. 4.]

Woods asserts that his actions on that day were in compliance with the standards for inmate management and supervision, and included a copy of these standards. [40-3, pp. 3, 5-28.] The procedures also outline the acceptable use of force to be used, if necessary, in certain situations. ( Id. )

Hayes testified that he was aware of the rules contained in the inmate handbook for the HCADC. [40-1, p. 22.] He stated that he was aware that according to the handbook, he could be disciplined for refusing to obey the verbal orders of a staff member. [40-1, p. 23.]

Hayes indicated that he had migraines when he was a child. [40-1, p. 25.] He stated that he had headaches for years, but were not as bad as the headache which ensued after the May 3, 2012, when Hayes allegedly hit his head on the wall while being handcuffed. [40-1, pp. 26-27.] Hayes contends that although he was in the medical unit under observation for 48 hours, he was not checked by a doctor during that time. [40-1, p. 29.] He agreed that a nurse "looked" at him on the date of the incident at issue in this lawsuit, but did not thoroughly exam him to observe the bruises on his body and arms. [40-1, p. 31.] Hayes testified at his deposition that some pictures were taken of his injuries, although later Hayes was told no pictures existed. [40-1, pp. 32-33.]

According to Hayes, he asked Woods if a different inmate could be housed in the same cell with Hayes at the time of the incident at issue in this lawsuit. [40-1, p. 36.] Woods allegedly cursed at Hayes and told Hayes to return to his cell. ( Id. ) Hayes admits he had stepped out of his cell at this time. [40-1, p. 37.] Woods allegedly continued to swear at Hayes, and told him to pack his belongings, that Hayes was moving to BD. ( Id. ) Hayes testified that "BD" signifies the place to house inmates for disciplinary problems. ( Id. ) Hayes stated that he understood that an inmate could be sent to BD for failing to follow a verbal command. [40-1, p. 38.]

Hayes stated that he began walking down the stairs heading for BD. [40-1, p. 39.] Woods was accompanied by McCabe and Garriga. [40-1, p. 40.] Hayes indicated that when he reached the sally-port, he stopped to ask Woods whether he could bring Lieutenant Johnson to hear the situation before they proceeded to BD. [40-1, p. 41; 40-2, p. 1.] Hayes had just told Woods he would not go to the "hole" because he believed he had not done anything to warrant being moved to BD. [40-2, p. 2.] Hayes contends that he was placed in handcuffs and pushed against the wall, with someone's hands around his neck. ( Id. ) Hayes stated that as he was trying to pull away from the neck hold, his head hit the wall twice. [40-2, p. 3.] Then other officers arrived in the area, and one of those officers escorted Hayes to BD. [40-2, pp. 3-6.] Hayes was examined by medical personnel when he arrived in BD. [40-2, p. 14.]

Hayes stated he named Garriga in the lawsuit because he touched Hayes during the incident in which he was being handcuffed. [40-2, p. 33.] Hayes testified that his face was against the wall so he did not know if Garriga actually touched him or caused him any injury. [40-2, pp. 34, 36.] According to the Defendants, Garriga had minimal involvement in the incident. [41, p. 8.] Garriga stated he told Hayes to pack his belongings to move to BD, and assisted after Hayes became aggressive in the sally-port by placing the handcuffs on Hayes. [40-3, p. 2; 40-4, p. 2; 40-5, p. 1.]

Hayes does not claim that Woods or Garriga were involved in the denial of medical treatment.[40-2, pp. 33-6, 38-9.] He claims that Johnson did not take pictures of the incident, and allegedly withheld evidence. [40-2, pp. 36-8.] Hayes claims she did not perform the duties of her position as a Lieutenant. [40-2, p. 39.] Hayes contends that Johnson left him in his room for 2-3 days without medical attention. [1, p. 5.] He claims that no pictures were taken and that he was "heald" "from my head slapping the wall" by the time he received medical attention. [1, p. 5.] Hayes testified that he was seen by the nurse immediately after the incident at issue in this lawsuit. [40-2, p. 55.]

Hayes' medical records indicate he was seen on May 4, 2012, regarding a "s/p altercation" and on May 12, 2012, for "headache." [40-8, p. 1.] The "s/p altercation" record provides that Hayes reported his head was slammed against the wall, although no marks were observed on his face, with no redness or swelling. [40-8, p. 25.] His gums were red but were not ...


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.