Voyles v. GEO Corporation of Corrections et al

Filing 93

ORDER granting 63 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 91 Motion for Hearing; adopting 79 Report and Recommendations. The Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge F. Keith Ball is hereby adopted as the finding of this Court. Signed by District Judge Daniel P. Jordan III on July 17, 2015. (SP)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
NORTHERN DIVISION
MICHAEL EDWARD VOYLES
V.

PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13CV1031 DPJ-FKB

GEORGE ZOLEY, ET AL.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Plaintiff Michael Edward Voyles, an inmate at the East Mississippi Correctional Facility
(EMCF), brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that prison officials denied
him adequate medical care. The case is presently before the Court on Defendant Michael
Reddix, M.D.’s motion for summary judgment [63] and the Report and Recommendation of
Magistrate Judge F. Keith Ball [79], recommending granting that motion. Voyles filed an
Objection [88], but it is conclusory and fails to address any of the substantive legal or factual
issues.
Voyles was diagnosed with Hepatitis C in 2007. Compl. [1] at 4. He claims that he
would benefit from radiation treatment or interferon, and Defendants have denied him access to
both treatments. Dr. Reddix is co-owner of Health Assurance LLC, the entity that operates the
medical department of EMCF. Voyles has not alleged any personal involvement by Dr. Reddix.
Instead, he contended at his hearing, and again in a Motion [91], that another doctor referred him
to Dr. Reddix for further evaluation, but that the examination never occurred. Voyles has not
produced any record evidence in opposition to Dr. Reddix’s Rule 56 motion suggesting Dr.
Reddix had any personal involvement in his treatment.

As pointed out by Judge Ball, liability under § 1983 may not be premised on a theory of
respondeat superior. Monnell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 691 (1978). Because Dr.
Reddix did not directly participate in any alleged denial of constitutional rights, Voyles’s claims
against him are dismissed.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [79] of United
States Magistrate Judge F. Keith Ball be, and the same is hereby, adopted as the finding of this
Court. Dr. Reddix’s motion for summary judgment [63] is granted. Plaintiff’s Motion [91] is
denied.
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 17th day of July, 2015.
s/ Daniel P. Jordan III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2