Gaines v. Hinds County Board of Supervisors et al

Filing 37

ORDER. This action is hereby dismissed. A separate order of dismissal will be entered. Signed by Magistrate Judge F. Keith Ball on 3/11/14 (dfk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
NORTHERN DIVISION
WILLIE B. GAINES

PLAINTIFF

VS.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13cv203-FKB

HINDS COUNTY BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS, et al.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Willie B. Gaines brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that he
received inadequate mental health treatment while he was a pretrial detainee at the Hinds
County Detention Center (HCDC). A Spears1 hearing has been held, and the parties have
consented to jurisdiction by the undersigned. Having considered the complaint and
Plaintiff’s testimony at the hearing, the Court concludes that this action should be
dismissed for failure to state a claim.
In or around October of 2012, Plaintiff was transferred from the custody of the
Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC) to HCDC. While in the custody of MDOC,
he had been treated for depression and bipolar disorder. Gaines complains that when he
arrived at HCDC, he did not see a physician, his medications were distributed by a jail
officer, rather than medical personnel, and he was given the wrong medication. He has
alleged no injury resulting from these events.
A pretrial detainee has a due process right to receive reasonable medical care.
See Hare v. City of Corinth, 74 F.3d 633, 650 (5th Cir. 1996). The right is equivalent to the
Eight Amendment right enjoyed by prisoners. Id. Thus, a pretrial detainee seeking to

1

See Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1985).

recover for a denial of reasonable medical care must allege deliberate indifference to
serious medical needs. See Varnado v. Lynaugh, 920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir. 1991);
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 105 (1976). To establish deliberate indifference, a
plaintiff must show that the defendant “refused to treat him, ignored his complaints,
intentionally treated him incorrectly, or engaged in any similar conduct that would clearly
evince a wanton disregard for any serious medical needs.” Domino v. Texas Dep’t of
Criminal Justice, 239 F.3d 725, 756 (5th Cir. 2001). Plaintiff’s allegations fall far short of
this standard. He has made no showing of deliberate indifference.
For this reason, Plaintiff’s claims are hereby dismissed with prejudice pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). A separate order of dismissal will be entered.
So ordered and adjudged, this the 11th day of March, 2014.
/s/ F. Keith Ball
______________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2