Skorvanek v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.
2016 Ohio 8328
| Ohio Ct. Cl. | 2016Background
- Plaintiff (inmate John Skorvanek) was housed in Frazier Health Center at Pickaway Correctional Institution with defendant inmate Scott Creech; both arrived in December 2011 and were assigned nearby beds.
- Creech became increasingly withdrawn and made disparaging/hostile remarks; a few weeks before the incident he told nearby inmates Borgmann and Waldroop he was "going to get" plaintiff. None of those inmates reported the comments to staff.
- Plaintiff heard secondhand that Creech might harm him but did not notify staff and did not fear an attack. He earlier had notified staff that Creech might harm another inmate (Hines).
- On November 12, 2013, Creech microwaved a mug of hot water, rolled to plaintiff’s bed, poured the hot water into plaintiff’s face and mouth, and struck plaintiff’s head twice with a cane; staff intervened within seconds and restrained Creech. Plaintiff was hospitalized for burns and head injury.
- Evidence showed Frazier is a low-security medical unit (~160 inmates) with regular officer rounds, accessible microwaves, and procedures for reporting threats; Creech had a doctor’s order for a cane and a history of remote disciplinary incidents and some mental-health contacts.
- Magistrate found defendant prison had neither actual nor constructive notice of an impending attack and that staff response was prompt; judgment recommended for defendant.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether prison was negligent for failing to prevent an inmate-on-inmate attack | Skorvanek argued ODRC should have foreseen Creech’s attack based on Creech’s statements, disciplinary and mental-health history, and inmate reports, and should have separated or supervised Creech | ODRC argued it had no actual or constructive notice of an impending attack, followed policies and rounds, and responded promptly when attack occurred | Held for defendant: plaintiff failed to prove foreseeability or notice required for negligence; no actionable negligence shown |
| Whether inmate warnings or remarks to other inmates created actual or constructive notice to staff | Plaintiff contended inmate statements to Borgmann/Waldroop and Creech’s behavior gave notice | Defendant pointed out those inmates did not report statements to staff; staff had no knowledge of a specific threat to plaintiff | Held: remarks were not conveyed to staff; absence of staff knowledge precludes actual notice and no basis for constructive notice shown |
| Whether Creech’s disciplinary/mental-health records put ODRC on notice of violent conduct | Plaintiff asserted prior discipline and mental-health treatment indicated risk of violence | Defendant noted records were remote, mostly nonviolent, and privileged mental-health records were not available to general staff; classification reviews kept Creech at lowest security level | Held: records did not show a pattern or imminence of violence that would put staff on notice |
| Whether facility supervision or policies were inadequate | Plaintiff asserted inadequate supervision allowed the attack (e.g., access to microwave, rounds) | Defendant showed policies in place, officer desk with line-of-sight, regular rounds, and that officers were present and responded quickly; microwaves permitted and cane authorized by doctor | Held: supervision and procedures were not shown to be breached; response was prompt so no liability for supervisory failure |
Key Cases Cited
- No authorities with official (published reporter) citations were relied on in the opinion for which Bluebook reporter citations are available.