From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Griffis v. Medford

United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Harrison Division
Sep 20, 2007
No. 05-3040 (W.D. Ark. Sep. 20, 2007)

Summary

finding that “a private physician treating an inmate at a private facility utilizing his independent medical judgment is not answerable to the state and does not act under color of state law for purposes of § 1983”

Summary of this case from Kittrell v. Smith

Opinion

No. 05-3040.

September 20, 2007


ORDER


Now on this 20th day of September, 2007, comes on for consideration the Report and Recommendation filed herein on August 31, 2007, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 157.) Neither plaintiff nor the defendants have filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation.

The Court has reviewed this case and, being well and sufficiently advised, finds as follows: The Report and Recommendation is proper and should be and hereby is adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, the Carroll County Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 89) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.

Specifically, the motion is GRANTED with respect to:

* plaintiff's claims that he was subjected to unconstitutional conditions of confinement and that he was denied medical care; and
* plaintiff's claims against defendants Jack Gentry, Mark Lotta, Sheila M. Howerton, and Regina Fox Jeffrey (who was substituted as a defendant for George Jeffries).

The motion is DENIED with respect to plaintiff's claim that he was denied due process when he was placed on lock-down and placed in an "emergency response chair" or restraint chair.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Griffis v. Medford

United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Harrison Division
Sep 20, 2007
No. 05-3040 (W.D. Ark. Sep. 20, 2007)

finding that “a private physician treating an inmate at a private facility utilizing his independent medical judgment is not answerable to the state and does not act under color of state law for purposes of § 1983”

Summary of this case from Kittrell v. Smith

finding that "a private physician treating an inmate at a private facility utilizing his independent medical judgment is not answerable to the state and does not act under color of state law for purposes of § 1983"

Summary of this case from Goodwin v. N.D.C.S. Med.
Case details for

Griffis v. Medford

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL S. GRIFFIS PLAINTIFF v. SHERIFF CHUCK MEDFORD, et al. DEFENDANTS

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Harrison Division

Date published: Sep 20, 2007

Citations

No. 05-3040 (W.D. Ark. Sep. 20, 2007)

Citing Cases

Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Service

See, e.g., Estate of Rice v. Corr. Med. Servs., 596 F.Supp.2d 1208, 1218-19 (N.D.Ind. 2009) (collecting…

Maddox v. Sather

Absent specific allegations stating a plausible claim that Dr. Erickson or Dr. Eichler acted under color of…