Marable v. Corizon Health Care

Filing 38

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER that the magistrate judge's R&R is ADOPTED IN FULL; the motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; that any official capacity claims against Odom are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and that any state-law claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as more fully set out in R&. Signed by Judge Liles C Burke on 2/28/2019. (AHI)

FILED
2019 Feb-28 AM 09:09
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
WESTERN DIVISION
ORRIN MARABLE,
Plaintiff,
v.
VIVIAN ODOM, CRNP,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 7:18-cv-00573-LCB-SGC

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The magistrate judge entered an amended report and recommendation (Doc.
37) on January 31, 2019, recommending that (1) the Court grant summary
judgment on the individual capacity claims against remaining defendant Vivian
Odom; (2) dismiss any official capacity claim against Odom; and (3) decline to
exercise supplemental jurisdiction to the extent plaintiff is alleging any state-law
claims. The parties were notified of their right to file objections with fourteen days
of the report and recommendation being entered by the magistrate judge. No
objections were filed.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the
record, including the report and recommendation, the Court concludes that there
are no genuine issues of material fact with respect to plaintiff’s claim under the

Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution against Odom in her
individual capacity; in particular, plaintiff has not shown that he was subject to
deliberate indifference at the hands of Odom during her short medical treatment of
him. Furthermore, to the extent plaintiff has asserted a claim against Odom in her
official capacity, it also fails.

An official capacity claim against Odon is, in

essence, a claim against Corizon, LLC (“Corizon”).

In addition to the reason

pointed out by the magistrate judge (i.e., plaintiff has not alleged that a Corizon
policy or custom caused the constitutional violation), the Court finds that any such
claim fails because there was no underlying constitutional violation. Finally, the
Court agrees with the magistrate judge that it has discretion to exercise
supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claim, and it declines to do so in this
case.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation
(Doc. 37) is hereby ADOPTED IN FULL and INCORPORATED by reference
herein.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment (Doc.
28) 1 is GRANTED.

1

After advising the parties, the magistrate judge construed the special report (Doc. 28) filed by Odom as a motion
for summary judgment and treated it accordingly. (Doc. 33 [order]).

2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any official capacity claims against Odom
are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any state-law claims are DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
A final judgment will be entered separately.

DONE and ORDERED February 28, 2019.

_________________________________
LILES C. BURKE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3