Edmundson v. Flathead County Sheriff Depatment et al

Filing 40

ORDER. Defendant's 31 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Plaintiff's 28 Motion to Compel is DENIED. The Court certifies that any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch on 8/18/2014. Mailed to Edmundson. (TAG, )

FILED
AUG' 8 201~
CIefk.

u.s. District Court

District Of Montana

Missoula

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

RODNEY A. EDMUNDSON,

CV 13-00032-M-JCL

Plaintiff,
ORDER

vs.
TAMMY BOWEN,
Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Rodney Edmundson's Motion to
Compel Discovery (Doc. 28) and Defendant Bowen's Motion for Summary
Judgment. (Doc. 31.) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636( c), Fed.R.Civ.P. 73, and upon
the written consent of the parties, this matter has been assigned to the undersigned
to conduct all further proceedings, enter judgment, and conduct all post-trial
proceedings in this matter. (Notice of Assignment, Doc. 20).
F or the reasons discussed, the Motion to Compel will be denied, the Motion
for Summary Judgment will be granted, and judgment will be entered in favor of
Defendant.
1

I. BACKGROUND!

Edmundson was incarcerated in the Flathead County Detention Center from
April 25, 2012 to August 7,2012. 2 (Bowen Facts, Doc. 34 at ~ 1; Edmundson
Facts, Doc. 38 at ~ 1.) During this time, Edmundson suffered from back and hip
pain as a result of a slip and fall in 2005. (Amended Complaint, Doc. 6 at 3.)
During his prior incarcerations at the Flathead County Detention Facility,
Edmundson received prescription pain medications. (Amended Complaint, Doc.
6-1 at 4, ~ 19.)
Nurse Bowen has been a registered nurse for 30 years and is a nurse
provider at the Flathead County Detention Facility. (Bowen Facts, Doc. 34 at ~ 2.)
As part of her responsibilities at the detention facility, Nurse Bowen dispenses
prescription medications and, where appropriate, medications as requested by
inmates. (Bowen Facts, Doc. 34 at 1[3.)
lConsistent with summary judgment standards discussed below, the
following facts are taken from the materials of record. The Court views the facts
and inferences from them in the light most favorable to Smith as the non-moving
party. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 474 U.S. 574, 587­
88 (1986); Betz v. Trainer Worthham & Co., Inc., 504 F.3d 1017, 1020-21 (9th
Cir.2007).
2There is a dispute between the parties regarding how many times prior to
April 25, 2012 Edmundson had been incarcerated in the Flathead County
Detention Center. Suffice it to say, this was not Edmundson's first visit to this
jail. The precise number of prior incarcerations is irrelevant for purposes of this
motion.
2

On May 4, 2012, Edmundson spoke with Nurse Bowen about resuming his

prescription medications he had purportedly been prescribed prior to his
incarceration. Nurse Bowen informed Edmundson that she did not believe that he
had been examined by an outside doctor and prescribed medications. She told him
she would be calling the Bozeman Police Department to verify that Edmundson
had been arrested with a backpack containing medications which the authorities at
the Gallatin County Detention Facility refused to give him. Nurse Bowen told
Edmundson that she did not know anything about his medications and he needed
to submit another sick call request to be seen by the detention facility's physician,
Dr. Dusing. (Amended Complaint, Doc. 2-1 at 6-7, ~~ 24-25.)
According to Bowen, Edmundson was receiving Tylenol, a brand name for
Acetaminophen, during his incarceration on a "pm" or as needed basis. (Bowen
Affidavit, Doc. 34-2 at 2, ~ 5-6.) Edmundson disputes he was receiving Tylenol.
But he does not dispute he was receiving a generic Acetaminophen. (Edmundson
Response Brief, Doc. 37 at 4.)
On June 4, 2012, Edmundson submitted a grievance against "Medical

Services" stating:
In regards to the medical services/treatment here at F.C.D. is "above"
fair, the problem I've encountered is that I'm refused my prescribed
medication now presently since 4-26-2012, when I arrived for the
second time this year (the first being (1-20-2012 thru 3-5-2012),) 1­
3

condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and
the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable
matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter
relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant
information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery
appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible
evidence.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)( 1). The Court has broad discretion to manage discovery. Hunt
v. County o/Orange, 672 F.3d 606,616 (9th Cir. 2012) (citation omitted); JeffD.

v. Otter, 643 F.3d 278,289 (9th Cir. 2011) (citing Little v. City o/Seattle, 863
F.2d 681, 685 (9th Cir.1988)).

B. Analysis
The only request at issue in the Motion to Compel is Edmundson's Request
for Production of Documents No.1 which sought:
Any and all grievances, complaints, or other documents received by
the F.C.D.C. jail staff, Commander, or Chief concerning the
mistreatment of inmates by defendant Tammy Bowen, and any
memoranda, investigative files, or other documents created in
response to such complaints since January 2012.
(Discovery Requests, Doc. 29-1 at 2.) Even if there were multiple prior
complaints against Nurse Bowen, it would not effect the ruling on the motion for
summary judgment. Nurse Bowen's prior acts cannot establish her actions on
June 14 and 15,2012. As such, the motion to compel will be denied.

13

IV. CONCLUSION
Based upon the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for
Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Plaintiffs Motion to Compel is DENIED.
The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendants and close
this case.
The Court certifies that any appeal ofthis decision would not be taken in
good faith.
DATED this 18th day of August, 2014.

iah C. Lynch
ited States Magistrate

14