Williams v. Newman et al

Filing 9

ORDER Adopting 7 Report and Recommendations. Closing Case. Motions Terminated: 7 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS on 42 USC 1983 case re 1 Complaint 42 USC 1983 or Bivens filed by Larae Williams Recommending t.. Signed by Judge Robert N. Scola, Jr on 7/28/2017. (vmz) NOTICE: If there are sealed documents in this case, they may be unsealed after 1 year or as directed by Court Order, unless they have been designated to be permanently sealed. See Local Rule 5.4 and Administrative Order 2014-69.

United States District Court
for the
Southern District of Florida
Larae Williams, Plaintiff,
v.
Corporal Newman, and others,
Defendants.

)
)
)
Civil Action No. 17-21725-Civ-Scola
)
)
)

Order Adopting Magistrate Judge’s Report And Recommendation
This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Patrick A.
White, consistent with Administrative Order 2003-19 of this Court, for a ruling
on all pre-trial, nondispositive matters and for a report and recommendation
on any dispositive matters. On July 10, 2017, Judge White issued a report,
recommending that, upon initial screening in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §
1915, the Court dismiss this complaint based on Plaintiff Larae Williams’s
failure to state a claim. (Prelim. Rep. of Magistrate, ECF No. 7.) Williams has
filed objections to the report. (ECF No. 8.)
The Court has reviewed—de novo—Judge White’s report, Williams’s
objections, the record, and the relevant legal authorities. In his 42 U.S.C. §
1983 complaint, Williams alleges violations of both the Eighth Amendment as
well as the Americans with Disabilities Act. Williams, confined to a wheelchair,
alleges, first, that on January 17, 2017, he was kept in a holding cell at the
courthouse for an excessive period without access to a restroom. As a result,
he soiled himself and was thereafter consequently bullied by another inmate.
Additionally, because he was not returned to his detention center until after
8:00 p.m., he missed his meal and medications. Second, Williams alleges that
on March 9, 2017, he missed a court hearing because the detention facility
failed to provide wheelchair-accessible transportation.
In his report, Judge White found Williams’s Eighth Amendment claim
failed because, in part, he was unable to establish the Defendants’ deliberate
indifference to a condition of confinement that inflicted unnecessary pain or
suffering. Regarding Williams’s ADA claim, Judge White concluded that
Williams had at most shown that the Defendants had been negligent on two
occasions but that he failed to establish actual discrimination that was based
on his disability.
In his objections, with respect to his Eighth Amendment claims, Williams
submits that he established that his conditions of confinement so obviously
inflicted suffering that the Defendants can reasonably be said to have acted

with deliberate indifference. Although Williams’s predicament might have
indeed been obvious, Williams’s complaint still fails to establish that the
Defendants acted with deliberate indifference. For example, in his objections,
Williams alleges that one of the Defendants responded to him that he did not
have access to a key for the restroom that could accommodate him. At most
this allegation, if true, would amount to only negligence, or perhaps
incompetence, falling well short of the showing required for establishing
deliberate indifference. Further, Williams’s other complaints, regarding his
missing a meal and his medication, being bullied, and missing a court date, do
not rise to the level of the “unnecessary pain and suffering” contemplated by an
Eighth Amendment claim. E.g. LaMarca v. Turner, 995 F.2d 1526, 1535 (11th
Cir. 1993).
Similar reasoning applies to Williams’s ADA claims. The most that
Williams has alleged is the Defendants were negligent in failing to properly
accommodate him. And while the Defendants’ failures are troubling, Williams
has not alleged facts that establish that such shortcomings amounted to
discrimination based on Williams’s disability.
In sum, upon a de novo review, the Court finds Judge White’s report and
recommendation cogent and compelling. The Court affirms and adopts Judge
White’s report and recommendation (ECF No. 7) and dismisses the complaint,
albeit without prejudice (ECF No. 1). The Court directs the Clerk to close this
case and to deny all pending motions as moot.
Done and ordered, at Miami, Florida, on July 28, 2017.
_______________________________
Robert N. Scola, Jr.
United States District Judge