Custis v. Clarke et al

Filing 40

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Elizabeth K. Dillon on 8/1/2017. (slt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ROANOKE DIVISION
RYRICKA NIKITA CUSTIS,
Plaintiff,
v.
HAROLD CLARKE, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 7:16cv00391
By: Elizabeth K. Dillon
United States District Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Ryricka Nikita Custis, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights action pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against several defendants at Red Onion State Prison (Red Onion). While Custis
alleges, inter alia, that Dr. Happy Smith appropriately ordered a bottom bunk assignment for him, he
seeks to hold Dr. Smith responsible for Red Onion staff’s delay in re-assigning Custis to a bottom
bunk. Dr. Smith filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that Custis’s cannot establish an
Eighth Amendment claim against Dr. Smith. Custis responded to the motion and stated that he “agrees
with what the defendant states” in the motion.
To prevail on an Eighth Amendment claim for denial of medical care, a plaintiff must come
forward with facts sufficient to demonstrate that a defendant was deliberately indifferent to a serious
medical need. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 105 (1976); Staples v. Va. Dep’t of Corr., 904 F. Supp.
487, 492 (E.D. Va. 1995). Custis and Dr. Smith agree that Custis has not done so. There is no genuine
dispute as to any material fact, and the court finds that Dr. Smith was not deliberately indifferent to a
serious medical need of Custis and was not personally involved in any delay in the bunk assignment.
Thus, the court will grant Dr. Smith’s motion for summary judgment.
An appropriate order will be entered.
Entered: August 1, 2017.

/s/ Elizabeth K. Dillon
Elizabeth K. Dillon
United States District Judge