773 F. Supp. 2d 255
N.D.N.Y.2011Background
- Plaintiff Shaquan Jordan, an inmate at Clinton Correctional Facility, sues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming excessive force, failure to intervene, and deliberate indifference to medical needs arising from an incident on May 1, 2008.
- Defendant Stoughton, a correctional officer, allegedly assaulted Jordan during the medication run in Hospital II after ordering him to step out of line for a pat-down.
- Nurse Harriman allegedly examined Jordan on May 2, 2008 and provided little or no medical treatment, despite Jordan's alleged injuries and photographs; IG investigation followed, deeming the claims unsubstantiated.
- Defendants Fischer (Commissioner), Artus (Superintendent), and Racette (Deputy Superintendent) are sued in their supervisory capacities for policy, training, and oversight; Jordan claims they were aware of or responsible for abuses at Clinton.
- Jordan identified Stoughton and Fitzpatrick in certain investigations, but did not identify all potential participants in the May 1 incident; unnamed John/Jane Does 1-3 are referenced but not fully identified or served.
- Magistrate Judge Baxter recommended dismissal of several defendants for lack of personal involvement and that Jordan be allowed to amend to identify John/Jane Does 1-2; the district court adopted this recommendation in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether supervisory defendants lacked personal involvement | Fischer, Artus, and Racette were aware of abuses and failed to remedy them. | No direct participation or sufficient involvement by Fischer, Artus, or Racette; supervisory liability not established. | Dismissal of Fischer, Artus, and Racette for lack of personal involvement. |
| Whether Harriman's medical care constituted deliberate indifference | Harriman ignored injuries and provided inadequate or inappropriate care. | Medical records show limited or no need for treatment; disagreement with medical judgment does not equal constitutional violation. | Deliberate indifference claim against Harriman dismissed. |
| Whether Stoughton used excessive force or failed to intervene | Stoughton beat Jordan and did not allow adequate medical care; officers failed to intervene. | No or contested use of force; credibility issues and timing undermine plaintiff's claims. | Excessive force claim against Stoughton survives summary judgment; issues of credibility and fact for trial. |
| Whether John/Jane Does 1-2 should be named and served; whether failure to identify them affects the claim | There were other officers involved; unnamed defendants should be named. | Failure to identify/serve unnamed defendants; possible dismissal unless amended. | Warning issued that failure to identify and amend will result in dismissal of unnamed defendants. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1992) (excessive force standards require objective and subjective elements)
- Blyden v. Mancusi, 186 F.3d 252 (2d Cir. 1999) (malicious use of force constitutes an Eighth Amendment violation per se)
- Colon v. Coughlin, 58 F.3d 865 (2d Cir. 1995) (personal involvement and supervisory liability framework)
- Dean v. Coughlin, 804 F.2d 207 (2d Cir. 1986) (inmate rights to medical treatment; right to treatment of choice limitations)
- Jeffreys v. Rossi, 275 F. Supp. 2d 463 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (failure-to-intervene theory in excessive force cases; officer liability when present and did not act)
- Wright v. Smith, 21 F.3d 496 (2d Cir. 1994) (personal involvement and supervisory liability standards set forth)