Maleeah v. Awe et al
Filing
32
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of the U.S. Magistrate Judge Recommending Denying 5 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Cager A. Maleeah without prejudice. Objections to R&R due by 2/5/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher L. Ray on 1/22/19. (jrb)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
CAGER A. MALEEAH,
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
FILED
Scott L. Poff, Clerk
United States District Court
By jburrell at 10:19 am, Jan 22, 2019
CV418-096
)
PA DARCY, et al.,
)
)
)
Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
In this denial of medical care case, plaintiff complains that
defendants’
acts
and
omissions
caused
him
harm,
including
hospitalization for a life-threatening infection, the amputation of a toe
and excision of infected bones and tissue in his foot, and ongoing balance
problems, nerve pain, and discomfort, which may never fade. See docs. 1
& 5; see doc. 14 (authorizing service of the Complaint on P.A. Darcy and
Nurses Grant, Tyler, Green, and Anderson). Defendant Nurse Anderson,
he contends, refused to give him his prescribed medication on two
occasions after he returned from the hospital to the prison. Doc. 5 at 22;
see doc. 1-2 at 16 (copy of August 2016 grievance). He thus seeks an Order
enjoining defendants from “interfering with, and denying [his] medical
procedures/treatment”
and
ordering
defendants
to
“facilitate
immediately, the process for plaintiff to receive necessary medical
treatment.” Doc. 5 at 1-2. Defendants oppose. Doc. 28.
To be entitled to a temporary restraining order or preliminary
injunction,1 a plaintiff must demonstrate: (1) a substantial likelihood of
ultimate success on the merits; (2) that a restraining order or injunction
is necessary to prevent irreparable injury; (3) that the threatened injury
outweighs the harm that the restraining order or injunction would inflict
on the other party; and (4) that the restraining order or injunction would
not be adverse to the public interest. Schiavo ex rel. Schindler v. Schiavo,
403 F.3d 1223, 1225–26 (11th Cir. 2005).
An “injunction is an
extraordinary and drastic remedy not to be granted unless the movant
1
If a plaintiff succeeds in making such a showing, then “the court may grant
injunctive relief, but the relief must be no broader than necessary to remedy the
constitutional violation.” Newman v. State of Ala., 683 F.2d 1312, 1319 (11th Cir.
1982). Accordingly, where there is a constitutional violation in the prison context,
courts traditionally are reluctant to interfere with prison administration and
discipline, unless there is a clear abuse of discretion. See Procunier v. Martinez, 416
U.S. 396, 404-05 (1974) (“Traditionally, federal courts have adopted a broad hands-off
attitude toward problems of prison administration [because] . . . courts are ill equipped
to deal with the increasingly urgent problems of prison administration and reform.”),
overruled on other grounds by Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S. 401 (1989). In such
cases, “[d]eference to prison authorities is especially appropriate.” Newman, 683 F.2d
at 1320-21 (reversing district court’s injunction requiring release of prisoners on
probation because it “involved the court in the operation of the State’s system of
criminal justice to a greater extent than necessary” and less intrusive equitable remedy
was available).
2
clearly established the ‘burden of persuasion’ as to the four requisites.”
Horton v. City of Augustine, 272 F.3d 1318, 1326 (11th Cir. 2001).
Here, as defendants note, plaintiff has attached documents showing
that his last grievance alleging less-than fully adequate care was lodged
nearly a year before filing this action. Doc. 1-2 at 23-25, cited in doc. 28
at 4. Indeed, his condition has stabilized since the infection ravaged him
in May 2016. See docs. 1 & 5. That his condition has not improved to his
satisfaction, or to the point he would be at but-for defendants’ alleged
(in)actions, doc. 5 at 23-24, does not manufacture any threat of serious or
imminent harm. Aside from his worries that a repeat of the events of the
Complaint — the failures that led to his infection lingering, untreated,
until it reached life-threatening magnitude — will occur absent Court
intervention, plaintiff does not allege that defendants have continued to
deny or offered less than adequate medical care. See id. In other words,
Maleeah shows no present and substantial risk of imminent harm which
compels enjoinment.
Northeastern Fla. Chapter of Ass’n of General
Contractors of Am. v. City of Jacksonville. Fla., 896 F.2d 1283, 1285 (11th
Cir. 1990) (to satisfy the irreparable injury requirement, a plaintiff must
show the threat of injury is “neither remote nor speculative, but actual
3
and imminent.”).
Because plaintiff has not met his burden of persuasion on all four
requisites for obtaining injunctive relief, his motion should be DENIED
without prejudice to refiling, should conditions warranting such relief
later arise. This Report and Recommendation (R&R) is submitted to the
district judge assigned to this action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)
and this Court’s Local Rule 72.3. Within 14 days of service, any party
may file written objections to this R&R with the Court and serve a copy
on all parties.
The document should be captioned “Objections to
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendations.”
Any request for
additional time to file objections should be filed with the Clerk for
consideration by the assigned district judge.
After the objections period has ended, the Clerk shall submit this
R&R together with any objections to the assigned district judge. The
district judge will review the magistrate judge’s findings and
recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The parties are
advised that failure to timely file objections will result in the waiver of
rights on appeal. 11th Cir. R. 3-1; see Symonett v. V.A. Leasing Corp.,
648 F. App’x 787, 790 (11th Cir. 2016); Mitchell v. United States, 612 F.
4
App’x 542, 545 (11th Cir. 2015).
SO REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED, this
22nd
January, 2019.
______________________________
CHRISTOPHER L. RAY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
5
day of
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?