Repp v. Corrections Corporation of America/C.C.A, 2:15-cv-00220

Plaintiff Terry Repp, a former Moore Haven inmate, alleged § 1983 Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference after losing vision from a detached retina in his right eye in 2013.
On April 7, 2013 Repp submitted a sick-call; Nurse Dunivent examined him and referred him to a doctor. Dr. Kankam saw Repp two days later and referred him to an ophthalmologist.
An April 24 specialist visit was canceled for an unexplained reason; Repp filed an informal grievance on May 2 and spoke with a nurse supervisor who advised follow-up sick call requests.
On May 22 Repp briefly spoke with Warden Laura Bedard, who told him the prison would not let him go blind. Repp was diagnosed with a detached retina on May 28 and underwent surgery in late June; he later had surgery on his other eye.
Repp sued Warden Bedard alleging she was deliberately indifferent; Bedard moved for summary judgment arguing lack of supervisory liability and absence of evidence she had subjective knowledge of a serious risk.
The Court granted summary judgment for Bedard, finding no genuine issue that she had subjective knowledge of the risk or a policy/custom causing the alleged deprivation; Bedard was dismissed with prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Warden Bedard was deliberately indifferent to Repp's serious medical need	Repp contends Bedard’s response when he told her about his eye showed indifference that led to harm	Bedard argues she had no subjective knowledge the retina was detached, had no role in treatment delays, and mere conversation is not deliberate indifference	Court: No. Repp produced no evidence Bedard knew of and disregarded a serious risk; summary judgment for Bedard
Whether supervisory liability attaches to Bedard absent personal participation or policy/custom causing harm	Repp relies on Bedard’s position as warden and her comment to infer liability	Bedard argues § 1983 does not permit vicarious liability; must show personal participation or causal policy/custom	Court: No supervisory liability. No evidence of Bedard’s personal involvement or a custom/policy to deny care; dismissal warranted

Brown v. Johnson, 387 F.3d 1344 (11th Cir. 2004) (deliberate indifference to serious medical needs violates the Eighth Amendment)
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976) (medical indifference standard; misdiagnosis alone does not establish Eighth Amendment violation)
Farrow v. West, 320 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 2003) (deliberate indifference requires subjective knowledge and disregard of excessive risk)
McElligott v. Foley, 182 F.3d 1248 (11th Cir. 1999) (elements for deliberate indifference include more than negligence)
Campbell v. Sikes, 169 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 1999) (summary judgment appropriate absent evidence of official's subjective awareness of risk)
Belcher v. City of Foley, 30 F.3d 1390 (11th Cir. 1994) (supervisory liability under § 1983 requires personal participation or causal connection)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard; genuine issue of material fact definition)
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (movant's summary judgment burden)