76 So. 3d 264
Ala. Civ. App.2011Background
- Inmate Douglas Crouch filed a petition in Montgomery Circuit Court seeking a writ of mandamus to obtain adequate medical care, meaningful access to courts, cessation of medical co-pays, and stopping two prison rules.
- The petition named the Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections (Richard Allen at the time), the ECF Warden (Leeposey Daniels), and CMS as respondents.
- The trial court granted motions to dismiss and denied the petition on November 16, 2010.
- Crouch appealed the denial of his mandamus petition.
- The court noted mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and reviewed for clear abuse of discretion; an evidentiary hearing on medical care is only warranted if inadequacy is alleged.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioner's mandamus claim for adequate medical care was properly denied. | Crouch contends the court should have held an evidentiary hearing on medical care. | Respondents contend the petition failed to allege inadequacy of care; no hearing required. | No reversible error; petition failed to show inadequate care; no evidentiary hearing required. |
| Whether the trial court was required to make factual findings. | Crouch argues the court should have made findings of fact. | No authority requiring findings of fact was cited by Crouch. | Not required; authority cited insufficient to mandate findings. |
| Whether the warden's and Commissioner's defenses defaulted due to tardy responses. | Crouch asserts default for failure to answer within 30 days. | The record shows a joint motion to dismiss; no default. | No merit; no default error. |
| Whether mandamus is proper to enforce court orders and address the 1995 order on access to courts. | Crouch asserts mandamus enforces court orders and compliance with the 1995 order. | Arguments are conclusory and do not show how the 1995 order relates to access to the law library. | Insufficient to warrant reversal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976) (constitutional right to adequate medical care in prison)
- Kilgore v. Jasper City Bd. of Education, 624 So. 2d 603 (Ala. Civ. App. 1993) (indulgence of presumptions in mandamus review)
- Ex parte State Dep't of Human Resources, 674 So.2d 1274 (Ala. Civ. App. 1995) (mandamus as extraordinary remedy; abuse of discretion standard)
- Perry v. State Dep't of Corr., 694 So.2d 24 (Ala. Civ. App. 1997) (evidentiary hearing not required where no inadequacy shown)
- Montanez v. QuestCare, Inc., 675 So.2d 466 (Ala. Civ. App. 1996) (preference for treatment different from provided care not Eighth Amendment violation)
- Board of Water Sewer Comm'rs of City of Mobile v. Bill Harbert Construction Co., 27 So. 3d 1223 (Ala. 2009) (appellate review limits when authority not cited)
- Cincinnati Ins. Cos. v. Barber Insulation, Inc., 946 So.2d 441 (Ala. 2006) (insufficient authority for reversal when only general propositions)