Antwan Daniels v. Prentice Benston


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion. Originating case number: 5:13-ct-03286-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999916976]. Mailed to: A. Daniels. [16-6327]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-6327 Doc: 46 Filed: 08/25/2016 Pg: 1 of 4 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6327 ANTWAN DANIELS, Plaintiff - Appellant, and JAMES C. WILLIS; ELDRON C. LEWIS; MELTON M. MELVIN, Plaintiffs, v. PRENTICE BENSTON; PHIL CORBETT, Defendants - Appellees, and RODNEY HESTER; BENNY LENNON; DONNIE ALMAN, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:13-ct-03286-FL) Submitted: July 28, 2016 Decided: Before SHEDD, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. August 25, 2016 Appeal: 16-6327 Doc: 46 Filed: 08/25/2016 Pg: 2 of 4 Antwan Daniels, Appellant Pro Se. Christopher J. Geis, WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 16-6327 Doc: 46 Filed: 08/25/2016 Pg: 3 of 4 PER CURIAM: Antwan Daniels appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Appellees and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action claiming a delay in treatment with respect to a shoulder injury and unsanitary conditions in the Bladen County Jail (BCJ). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We conclude that the district court did not reversibly err in granting summary judgment to Appellee Benston on Daniels’ claim against him for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs because there is no record evidence tending to suggest or show that Benston knew of and disregarded an excessive Daniels’ health during his stay in the BCJ. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 178 (4th Cir. 2014). risk to See Jackson v. To the extent that Daniels sought to hold Benston liable in a supervisory capacity, the lack of any record evidence tending to suggest or show knowledge by Benston that any subordinate of his was engaged in conduct posing constitutional See Shaw v. a pervasive injury to Stroud, 13 and Daniels F.3d unreasonable is fatal 791, 799 to such (4th risk a Cir. of claim. 1994). We therefore affirm the district court’s ruling granting summary judgment to Benston in this regard. See Bryant v. Bell Atl. Md., Inc., 288 F.3d 124, 132 (4th Cir. 2002). the district court’s remaining 3 rulings, we With respect to affirm for the Appeal: 16-6327 Doc: 46 reasons Filed: 08/25/2016 stated by the Pg: 4 of 4 district court. Daniels v. Benston, No. 5:13-ct-03286-FL (E.D.N.C. Jan. 21, 2016). We grant Daniels’ motions to supplement informal brief, to submit corrective emotional injury. information, and to supplement mental or With respect to Daniels’ motion to submit letter evidence and for judgment, we grant the motion in part and deny it in part, granting the request to evidence but denying the request for judgment. motions to appoint counsel, for a submit letter We deny Daniels’ transcript at government expense, for a default judgment, to compel document production, for entry of default, for a permanent injunction, for discovery materials, to reverse the district court’s ruling, and to add a negligence claim. excess briefs. We also deny Appellees’ motions to strike We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 4

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?