Knouse v. Primecare Medical of West Virginia, Inc.
2:18-cv-01014
S.D.W. VaJan 17, 2019Background
- Dr. Charles Knouse, a pretrial detainee at South Central Regional Jail (SCRJ), told the magistrate he was not receiving necessary cardiac medication and could not self-catheterize; magistrate ordered SCRJ to place him in the medical unit and resume all prescribed medications.
- SCRJ personnel briefly received the court order; a copy was emailed to Sgt. Michael Toney, who forwarded it to Lt. Jaburs Terry.
- A few days after the order, Dr. Knouse died while in custody; his estate filed suit alleging deliberate indifference and related state claims against jail staff including Toney and Terry.
- The amended complaint alleged that Toney failed to properly log/copy the order; alleged Terry failed to follow the order, moved Knouse out of the medical unit into booking, and that Knouse did not receive Suboxone.
- Defendants moved to dismiss; the court evaluated federal (§ 1983/deliberate indifference) and state-law claims (negligence, state constitutional claims, and state-law qualified immunity).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Toney was deliberately indifferent in violation of Fourteenth Amendment | Toney received the court order and failed to copy/time-stamp it, exhibiting deliberate indifference | Toney did not deny, delay, or interfere with medical care and forwarded the order to his supervisor | Dismissed: complaint lacks factual allegations showing Toney actually recognized risk or acted inappropriately |
| Whether Terry was deliberately indifferent in violation of Fourteenth Amendment | Terry saw and circulated the order, then failed to comply, moved Knouse out of medical, and prevented Suboxone administration | Terry contends he lacked authority/licensure to administer narcotics and plaintiff pleads insufficient facts | Denied: allegations plausibly show Terry knew of risk and took actions (moving detainee, failing to ensure med) allowing inference of subjective awareness |
| Whether state-law negligence claims against Toney and Terry survive | Estate alleges negligence in handling court order and medical care | Defendants assert discretionary-function/state qualified immunity bars negligence claims | Dismissed with prejudice: correctional officers’ actions are discretionary and simple negligence is barred |
| Whether state constitutional claims under WV Constitution are actionable for damages | Estate asserts violations of multiple WV constitutional provisions | Defendants argue plaintiff fails to particularize rights and monetary damages are not available for certain provisions | Dismissed: claims lack particularized showing; some provisions don’t authorize money damages or separate causes of action |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (plausibility standard for complaints)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. 2007) (labels/conclusions insufficient; pleading requires factual plausibility)
- Reichle v. Howards, 566 U.S. 658 (U.S. 2012) (qualified immunity two-step)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (U.S. 2011) (clearly established law standard)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (U.S. 1994) (deliberate indifference standard)
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (U.S. 1976) (deliberate indifference via denial/delay/interference with medical care)
- Scinto v. Stansberry, 841 F.3d 219 (4th Cir. 2016) (right to be free from deliberate indifference clearly established)
- Parrish ex rel. Lee v. Cleveland, 372 F.3d 294 (4th Cir. 2004) (subjective awareness and inappropriate response elements)
- Winfield v. Bass, 106 F.3d 525 (4th Cir. 1997) (identify specific right at proper level of particularity)
- Giarratano v. Johnson, 521 F.3d 298 (4th Cir. 2008) (Rule 12(b)(6) standard discussion)