United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Eastern Division
JOHN W. MANNING Reg #47026-079 PLAINTIFF
B. HOY, et al. DEFENDANTS
Procedure for Filing Objections:
Recommended Disposition (“Recommendation”) has
been sent to Judge James M. Moody Jr. You may file written
objections to this Recommendation. If you file objections,
they should be specific and must include the factual or legal
basis for your objection.
considered, objections must be received in the office of the
Court Clerk within 14 days of this Recommendation. If no
objections are filed, Judge Moody can adopt this
Recommendation without independently reviewing the record. By
not objecting, you may also waive any right to appeal
questions of fact.
John W. Manning, an inmate at Forrest City Medium Federal
Correctional Institution (“FCM-FCI”), filed his
complaint without the help of a lawyer. (Docket entries #1)
Federal law requires courts to review prisoner complaints
before serving defendants and to dismiss any claims that are
legally frivolous or malicious; that fail to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted; or that seek monetary
relief from a defendant who is immune from paying damages. 28
U.S.C. § 1915A(b). When making this determination,
courts accept as true all factual allegations in the
complaint, and the court may consider attachments to the
complaint. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009); Reynolds v. Dormire, 636 F.3d 976, 979 (8th
to Mr. Manning's complaint, he was transferred to FCM-FCI
from FCM Butner on April 23, 2018. (#1) On April 27, 2018, he
sent Defendant Hoy, the health service administrator at
FCM-FCI, a request asking to be transferred back to FCM
Butner or another medical care facility so that he could get
needed medical care. (#1)
Hoy declined his request because Mr. Manning medical
assessment was changed from Care Level 3 to Care Level 2.
(#1) Mr. Manning asserts that Defendant Hoy and Defendant
Moorehart, a nurse practitioner at FCM-FCI, changed him to
Care Level 2 without consulting with a physician, in
violation of his federally protected rights. (#1)
Manning attached a letter to his complaint from Warden
Beasley signed on May 24, 2018, that explains Mr.
Manning's change to Care Level 2:
A review of this matter revealed that you are appropriately
listed as a Care Level 2 inmate. During your prior
incarceration at FMC Butner, you were being treated for
prostate cancer and received several rounds of chemotherapy.
Currently, you do not require that level of care. You also
received stent placement in one of [your] coronary arteries
and required a higher level of care in 2013 while designated
to FMC Butner. Currently, your medical diagnosis including
diabetes type II, high cholesterol, history of seizures, high
blood pressure, history of prostate cancer, history of
cardiac stent placement, history of stroke, and chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease. These medical diagnoses are
stable and manageable in a Care Level 2 institution.
Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual
punishment prohibits prison officials from deliberately
ignoring inmates' serious medical needs. Estelle v.
Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104-08 (1976). To succeed on an
inadequate-medical-care claim, a prisoner must prove that he
had an objectively serious medical need and that prison
officials actually knew of the need, but deliberately
disregarded it. Id.; Langford v. Norris,
614 F.3d 445, 460 (8th Cir. 2010); Dulany v.
Carnahan, 132 F.3d 1234, 1239 (8th Cir. 1997).
standard for deliberate-indifference conduct is high.
Negligence, gross negligence, and disagreement with the
treatment decisions cannot support a claim of deliberate
indifference. Langford, 614 F.3d at 460; Gibson
v. Weber, 433 F.3d 642, 646 (8th Cir. 2006). To
state a claim, Mr. Manning must allege facts showing that the
Defendants' actions were “so inappropriate as to
evidence intentional maltreatment or a refusal to provide
essential care.” Dulany, 132 F.3d 1234,
1240-41 (8th Cir. 1997).
Mr. Manning has not alleged that Defendants disregarded any
serious medical need since his incarceration at FCM-FCI; nor
has he alleged that he suffered any harm as a result of his
placement in facility that provides only Care Level 2
services. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e) (prisoner cannot
recover damages, “for mental or emotional injury
suffered while in custody without a prior showing of physical
injury”); Robinson v. Hager, 292 F.3d 560, 564
(8th Cir. 2002) (holding as a matter of law that prisoner
could not prevail on his inadequate care claim without
evidence of actual harm).
all of Mr. Manning's allegations are true, his
reassignment from Care Level 3 to Care Level 2 without a
physician's approval, standing alone, fails to state a
federal claim for relief Likewise, even if the Defendants
violated a prison rule or regulation by reassigning Mr.
Manning without a doctor's approval, he has not stated a
federal claim for relief. Prison officials do not violate the
constitution when they fail to adhere to internal prison
rules or regulations. Phillips v. Norris, 320 ...