Wilmer Payne v. Sevier Cty., Tenn.
681 F. App'x 443
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- In 2013, inmate Wilmer Payne at Sevier County Jail complained of tooth pain, headaches, and nosebleeds; First Med, the County's contracted medical provider, repeatedly treated him with antibiotics over several months.
- Payne submitted multiple sick-call requests and five grievances alleging inadequate care and delay; jail lieutenant forwarded those grievances to First Med rather than addressing them directly.
- After repeated examinations by LPNs, a PA, and the jail dentist, a CT scan (ordered by First Med) revealed an aggressive mass indicative of oral cancer; Payne learned the result only after being sent to an ER for severe nosebleeds and was released early for cancer treatment.
- Payne sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference by First Med and county employees; First Med settled, but the County moved for summary judgment.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the County; the Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding Payne failed to show a county policy or custom caused the constitutional violation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a county custom of forwarding medical grievances to contractor can impose Monell liability | Payne: County habitually forwarded grievances to First Med, causing delay and harm | County: No proof of a widespread County practice beyond Payne's own grievances; forwarding was due to individual officer's busyness | No — Plaintiff produced only his grievances; insufficient to show a well-settled custom attributable to the County |
| Whether County policy of permitting LPNs to diagnose/treat without direct physician supervision creates municipal liability | Payne: Use of unsupervised LPNs amounts to a policy causing deliberate indifference because LPNs lack diagnostic training | County: Allowing LPNs to provide care is not facially unconstitutional and does not establish policy-based deliberate indifference | No — Plaintiff presented no pattern of prior unconstitutional actions or obvious, patently obvious risk that would establish deliberate indifference |
| Standard for proving Monell liability via policy or custom | (overarching) Plaintiff: County liable because contractor’s actions are effectively county decisions for nondelegable duty | County: Municipality not liable absent delegation of policymaking or evidence that County maintained or ratified unconstitutional policies | Court: Monell requires proof that a county policy/custom caused the violation; neither shown here |
| Applicability of non-delegable duty when services are contracted | Payne (and concurrence concern): County remains responsible for constitutional deprivations by its contractor | County: Liability requires evidence of abdication of review or ratification; mere contracting does not automatically transfer liability | Court: Declined to find Monell liability on record; concurrence warns municipalities cannot shirk duties by contracting and ignoring oversight |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. City of Wyoming, 821 F.3d 697 (6th Cir. 2016) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Baynes v. Cleland, 799 F.3d 600 (6th Cir. 2015) (Monell requires a county policy or custom causally linked to violation)
- Cash v. Hamilton Cty. Dep’t of Adult Prob., 388 F.3d 539 (6th Cir. 2004) (definition of municipal "custom")
- Thomas v. City of Chattanooga, 398 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2005) (plaintiff must show several similar instances beyond the plaintiff's own case to prove a custom)
- Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397 (1997) (definition of municipal "policy" and deliberate indifference standard)
- Miller v. Calhoun Cty., 408 F.3d 803 (6th Cir. 2005) (need for prior unconstitutional actions to show deliberate indifference by policymakers)
- Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (2011) (rare cases where unconstitutional consequences are "patently obvious")
- Wallin v. Norman, 317 F.3d 558 (6th Cir. 2003) (Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference requires conscious disregard of substantial risk)
- Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469 (1986) (municipal liability and policymaker delegation principles)
- St. Louis v. Praprotnik, 485 U.S. 112 (1988) (supervisor's acquiescence in subordinate decisions does not always constitute delegation of municipal policy)
- Ancata v. Prison Health Servs., 769 F.2d 700 (11th Cir. 1985) (discussed in concurrence regarding municipality liability for contractor-caused deprivations)