Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ruffin v. York

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division

June 23, 2016

RAY RUFFIN, ADC #89703, Plaintiff,
v.
DEBRA YORK, et al., Defendants.

          Ray Ruffin, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

          Leland Felix, Defendant, represented by Dan F. Bufford, Laser Law Firm, P.A., James D. Burns, Laser Law Firm, P.A. & Ryne H. Ballou, Laser Law Firm, P.A..

          Felix Limb and Brace Company, Defendant, represented by Dan F. Bufford, Laser Law Firm, P.A., James D. Burns, Laser Law Firm, P.A. & Ryne H. Ballou, Laser Law Firm, P.A..

          RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

          BETH DEERE, Magistrate Judge.

         I. Procedures for Filing Objections:

         This Recommended Disposition ("Recommendation") has been sent to Judge James M. Moody Jr. A party to this suit may file written objections with the Clerk of Court within fourteen (14) days of filing of the Recommendation. Objections must be specific and must include the factual or legal basis for the objection. An objection to a factual finding must identify the finding of fact believed to be wrong and describe the evidence that supports that belief.

         By not objecting, any right to appeal questions of fact may be jeopardized. And, if no objections are filed, Judge Moody can adopt this Recommendation without independently reviewing the record.

         II. Background:

         Plaintiff Ray Ruffin, formerly an inmate at the Varner Supermax Unit of the Arkansas Department of Corrections ("ADC"), filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit claiming that the Defendants York, Norris, Griffin, and Felix were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. He also included pendent state claims for medical malpractice and negligence against Defendants Felix and Felix Limb and Brace Company. (Docket entry #2)

         The Court has already dismissed Mr. Ruffin's claims against Defendants Griffin, Norris, and York based on his failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. (#62) The remaining Defendants, Leland Felix and Felix Limb and Brace Company ("Felix Defendants"), have now moved for summary judgment. They argue they are not liable under either 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or the Arkansas Medical Malpractice Act. They further contend that they were not negligent. (#80) Mr. Ruffin contends that there are material facts in dispute and that he should be allowed to proceed on his remaining claims. (#90)

         III. Discussion:

         A. Standard

         Summary judgment means that the court rules in favor of a party without the need for a trial. A party is entitled to summary judgment if the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the party on the other side of the lawsuit, shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any fact that is important to the outcome of the case. FED.R.CIV.P. 56; Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,477 U.S. 317, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.