United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Hot Springs Division
MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND
MARK E. FORD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
a civil rights action filed by Plaintiff, Austin Hill,
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is currently
incarcerated in the Arkansas Department of Corrections
(“ADC”), Varner Unit. Pursuant to the provisions
of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and (3)(2011), the Honorable P.
K. Holmes, III, Chief United States District Judge, referred
this case to the undersigned for the purpose of making a
report and recommendation.
before me is Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment.
(Doc. 21) After careful consideration, the undersigned makes
the following Report and Recommendation.
filed his unsigned Complaint April 29, 2015. (Doc. 1) The
Court directed him to sign and return his Complaint (Doc. 3),
which he did on May 7, 2015. (Doc. 6) Plaintiff's
Complaint centers on his time spent in the Ouachita County
Detention Center (OCDC). Plaintiff alleges he was exposed to
tuberculosis by being housed with inmate Philip Brown in B
pod. He alleges there are no tuberculosis lights in B Pod or
in OCDC. He further alleges had not been given a shot or
checked for tuberculosis at all. Plaintiff feels his life has
been placed in danger. (Doc. 6, p. 11)
alleges he was exposed to Staphylococcus between February 5,
2015 and February 8, 2015. He alleges inmate Blake Barner had
an infection in his leg and was housed within B pod during
this time. (Doc. 6, p. 11)
proceeds against both Defendants in their personal capacity.
(Doc. 6, pp. 3-5) He alleges Norwood is the Sheriff and has
first-hand knowledge of all actions taking place at the jail.
(Doc. 6, p. 3) He alleges Greeley is the jail administrator,
and that he has not responded to any of Plaintiff's
grievances. (Doc. 6, pp. 4-5)
seeks compensatory damages of $200, 000 for pain, suffering
and ill-treatment, appointment of an attorney, and a full
investigation into the Ouachita County Jail. (Doc. 6, p. 13)
filed their Summary Judgment Motion on June 10, 2016. (Doc.
21) A Summary Judgment hearing was held on July 26, 2016, to
permit Plaintiff to respond orally to the Motion. (Doc. 27)
Plaintiff appeared via video conference.
testified he filed a grievance form concerning his claims,
but he does not know what happened to it. He testified he had
explained this on his Complaint form. On the form, Plaintiff
had written that there is no grievance procedure at OCDC. He
further stated if an inmate files a grievance no copy is
given to the inmate, and no number is assigned so that it may
be traced. When questioned further, Plaintiff testified he
filed his grievance sometime in July 2015.
further testified he did not know if he contracted anything,
but he never got sick. When he went to the ADC he was not
tested or treated for anything.
Court “shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows
that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and
the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). “[A] genuine issue of material fact
exists if: (1) there is a dispute of fact; (2) the disputed
fact is material to the outcome of the case; and (3) the
dispute is genuine, that is, a reasonable jury could return a
verdict for either party.” RSBI Aerospace, Inc. v.
Affiliated FM Ins. Co.,49 F.3d 399, 401 (8th Cir.
1995). The moving party has the burden of showing the absence
of a genuine issue of material fact and that they are
entitled to judgment as a matter of law, but the non-moving
party may not rest upon mere denials or allegations in the
pleadings and must set forth specific facts to raise a
genuine issue for trial. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,
Inc.,477 U.S. 242, 256 (1986); Celotex Corp. v.
Catrett,477 U.S. 317, 324 (1986). The Court must view
all evidence and inferences in a light most favorable to the
nonmoving party. See McCleary v. ReliaStar Life Ins.
Co.,682 F.3d 1116, 1119 (8th Cir. 2012). However,