Richey v. North Atlantic Extradition Services, 5:10-cv-00412

Richey, detained on a Kansas parole-violation warrant, alleges inadequate medical care in transit to Kentucky.
NAES, a private prisoner-transport company under contract with state facilities, allegedly refused to transport Richey’s epilepsy medication (Dilantin).
Richey claims he is or was prescribed Dilantin by a Kentucky facility and that he informed NAES personnel of his need for the medication.
During multiple legs of transport (Kansas to Mississippi to Kentucky), Richey allegedly suffered seizures and received no treatment or appropriate care for his epilepsy.
Richey also alleges deficient temperature control and lack of adequate clothing/heat in the transport vans, causing him frostbite and discomfort; he claims no seat belts were provided.
Richey sought damages, declaratory and injunctive relief, and, in amended pleadings, named individual NAES employees as defendants.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Deliberate indifference to medical needs	Richey alleges NAES refused to transport his epilepsy medication, causing seizures.	NAES contends there was no denial of care or intent to harm; no actual medication administration occurred.	Denial of summary judgment; triable issue as to deliberate indifference.
Deliberate indifference to health and safety (seat belts/conditions)	Lack of restraints and poor heat/clothing created serious risk.	Absence of seat belts alone does not establish a constitutional violation.	Summary judgment granted for NAES on Count II.
Negligence claim (criminal or common-law)	Requests relief for negligent failure to provide clothing/heat and medical care.	Seeks dismissal or limited scope under applicable law; assertedly not a constitutional claim.	Count III viable; negligence claim generally allowed to proceed; needs trial.
Leave to amend complaint	Pro se plaintiff should be allowed to name individual officers and add a seizure-claimallegation.	Late amendment could be prejudicial and futile for some counts.	GRANT in part; allow amendment as to Counts I and III; deny as to Count II.

Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (U.S. 1976) (establishes Eighth Amendment cruel-and-unusual-punishment standard for medical care in custody)
Hudson v. McHugh, 148 F.3d 859 (7th Cir. 1998) (deliberate indifference standard for medical care applies to pretrial detainees as well as inmates)
Comstock v. McCrary, 273 F.3d 693 (6th Cir. 2001) (requires showing of actual subjective disregard of risk to prisoner health)
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (U.S. 1986) (summary judgment standard and the burden of showing no genuine issue of material fact)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (affirmative obligation to view evidence in light most favorable to the non-movant)
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (U.S. 1986) (establishes burden-shifting framework for summary judgment)