Million v. GROUNDS et al

Filing 87

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 84 Report and Recommendations, GRANTING 77 MOTION for Summary Judgment with Brief in Support filed by Alvie W. King, FNU Neal, DAWN E GROUNDS, FNU Choat.. Signed by Judge Rodney Gilstrap on 9/17/2015. (sm, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
EARL RAYMOND MILLION

§

v.

§

DAWN GROUNDS, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14cv11

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Earl Million filed this lawsuit complaining of alleged violations of his
constitutional rights. This Court ordered the case be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules
for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges. As Defendants, he names Warden
Dawn Merchant (formerly known as Dawn Grounds) and officers Patric Neal, T. Choate, and Alvie
King. Another defendant, Lt. Moore, has previously been dismissed.
I. The Plaintiffs’ Allegations
The one claim remaining in the lawsuit concerns an injury Plaintiff suffered on March 7,
2012, when an overhead exhaust system fell on him while he was showering. He contends Neal,
Choate, and King were aware of the risk posed by the poor condition of the shower area and Warden
Merchant knew or should have known the condition would eventually cause harm to prisoners if not
repaired or closed down.
II. The Motion for Summary Judgment
The Defendants argue Plaintiff’s claims allege no more than negligence and do not rise to
the level of deliberate indifference. They also assert Plaintiff has not demonstrated the long-term
injuries he claims to have suffered, and they invoke the defense of qualified immunity.

1

III. The Magistrate Judge’s Report
After review of the pleadings, the Magistrate Judge recommended the Defendants’ motion
for summary judgment be granted. The Magistrate Judge concluded Plaintiff failed to set out a
showing of deliberate indifference to his safety and failed to overcome the Defendants’ claim to
qualified immunity. The Magistrate Judge also stated Plaintiff’s allegations of prison rule violations
did not rise to the level of a constitutional claim.
IV. The Plaintiff’s Objections and Analysis
In his objections, Plaintiff contends Lt. Moore has no evidence that she conducted any of the
interviews she said she did. Plaintiff also attaches medical records to support his claim of injury.
However, these records do not reveal any injuries, but merely state “we will obtain MRI brain and
C spine to be sure that we are not missing anything.” (Exhibit to Plaintiff’s Objections, docket no.
86, p. 5). Plaintiff does not address the Magistrate Judge’s conclusions that Plaintiff failed to show
any of the named Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his safety, and he failed to overcome
the Defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity.
V. Conclusion
The Court has conducted a careful de novo review of those portions of the Magistrate Judge’s
proposed findings and recommendations to which the Plaintiff objected. See 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)
(district judge shall “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”) Upon such de novo review,
the Court has determined the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct and the Plaintiff’s objections
are without merit. It is accordingly
ORDERED the Plaintiff’s objections are overruled and the Report of the Magistrate Judge
(docket no. 84) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (docket no. 77) is GRANTED
and the above-styled civil action is DISMISSED with prejudice. It is further

2

ORDERED any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby
DENIED.

SIGNED this 19th day of December, 2011.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 17th day of September, 2015.

____________________________________
RODNEY GILSTRAP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3