105 F.3d 648 (4th Cir. 1997), 96-6012, O'Berry v. Allendale Police Dept.

Docket Nº:96-6012.
Citation:105 F.3d 648
Party Name:Malachi O'BERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ALLENDALE POLICE DEPARTMENT; James Grant, individually and as Chief of Allendale Police Department; Demetrius Davis, individually and as an officer of the Allendale Police Department; Town of Allendale, South Carolina; Allendale County, a municipality of the State of South Carolina; John Stokes, individually
Case Date:January 08, 1997
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 648

105 F.3d 648 (4th Cir. 1997)

Malachi O'BERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

ALLENDALE POLICE DEPARTMENT; James Grant, individually and as Chief of Allendale Police Department; Demetrius Davis, individually and as an officer of the Allendale Police Department; Town of Allendale, South Carolina; Allendale County, a municipality of the State of South Carolina; John Stokes, individually and in his capacity as jail administrator, Allendale County, South Carolina; Lorenzo Doe, individually and as an employee of the Allendale County jail; John Doe and Richard Roe, an unknown number of unidentified employees of the Allendale County jail, individually and as employees of the Allendale jail, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 96-6012.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

January 8, 1997

Editorial Note:

This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA4 Rule 36 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

Argued Dec. 2, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-94-2098-1-6)

R. Edward Hemingway, THE HEMINGWAY LAW FIRM, Columbia, SC, for Appellant.

Christy Scott Stephens, BOGOSLOW & JONES, Walterboro, SC, for Appellees.

ON BRIEF: W. Gary White, III, Columbia, SC, for Appellant. Marvin C. Jones, BOGOSLOW & JONES, Walterboro, SC, for Appellees.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Alleging violations of both federal and state law, Malachi O'Berry brought suit against the Town of Allendale, the Allendale Police Department, individual officers in the Allendale Police Department, the Allendale County Detention Center, and individual jailers at the Allendale County Detention Center. 1 Specifically, O'Berry contends that Officer Davis and Jailers Doe and Stokes showed deliberate indifference to his medical needs; that the Town of Allendale failed to train, supervise, and discipline Officer Davis; and that Officer Davis falsely arrested him. See 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West 1994). In addition, O'Berry brought a state-law battery claim against Officer Davis for the initial arrest and against Officer Davis and Jailer Doe for placing him in the detention facility. O'Berry also brought a state law false arrest and unlawful detention claim against Officer Davis. Finally, O'Berry brought, pursuant to the South Carolina Tort Claims Act, a claim of gross negligence against the Allendale County Detention Center; and, at the close of evidence, he attempted to assert the same claim against the Town of Allendale. See S.C.Code Ann. § 15-78-60(25) (Law.Co-op.Supp.1995).

At the conclusion of O'Berry's case, Defendants moved for judgment as a matter of law. The district court granted the motion of Officer Davis, Jailer Doe, and Jailer Stokes on the § 1983 deliberate indifference claim and the motion of the Town of Allendale on the state-law claim of gross negligence. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Defendants on each remaining cause of action.

On appeal, O'Berry raises several legal and evidentiary challenges to the proceedings below. He argues that the district court erred in (1) failing to give a requested jury instruction; (2) granting Defendants' motions for judgment as a matter of law on two causes of action; (3) denying him the opportunity to introduce the deposition testimony of Jailer Stokes and Officer Davis; (4) allowing Defendants to introduce evidence...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP