From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Corring v. Pearl River Cnty.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Dec 20, 2013
550 F. App'x 204 (5th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 13-60094

12-20-2013

DANIEL GEORGE CORRING, Plaintiff-Appellant v. PEARL RIVER COUNTY; RITA LUMPKIN, Defendants-Appellees


Summary Calendar


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:11-CV-262

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

Daniel George Corring, Mississippi prisoner # 170298, appeals the dismissal on summary judgment of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that his constitutional rights were violated by the defendants' deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs when he was a detainee in the Pearl River County jail. We affirm.

We find no basis in the record for crediting the complaint's conclusory contentions that Rita Lumpkin was deliberately indifferent to Corring's medical needs. See Hathaway v. Bazany, 507 F.3d 312, 319 (5th Cir. 2007). The record shows at most that Corring disagreed with Lumpkin about his treatment regimen or that she was arguably negligent or committed malpractice, none of which constitutes a sufficient basis for casting Lumpkin in judgment under § 1983. See Stewart v. Murphy, 174 F.3d 530, 534 (5th Cir. 1999); Banuelos v. McFarland, 41 F.3d 232, 235 (5th Cir. 1995). Additionally, as Corring failed to establish an underlying constitutional violation by Lumpkin, i.e., deliberate indifference by her to his serious medical needs, Pearl River County cannot be liable on his theory that it had an official policy of failing to train its agents. See Hare v. City of Corinth, Miss., 74 F.3d 633, 649 n.4 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

The judgment is AFFIRMED. Corring's motions for oral argument and for appointment of counsel are DENIED.


Summaries of

Corring v. Pearl River Cnty.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Dec 20, 2013
550 F. App'x 204 (5th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

Corring v. Pearl River Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL GEORGE CORRING, Plaintiff-Appellant v. PEARL RIVER COUNTY; RITA…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Dec 20, 2013

Citations

550 F. App'x 204 (5th Cir. 2013)

Citing Cases

Sheriff v. City of Jackson

Further, a failure to train claim requires an underlying constitutional violation. Ball v. Marion Cnty.,…

Gatson v. City of Louisville

Therefore, the City cannot be liable on a failure-to-train-or-supervise claim. See Corring v. Pearl River…