Beck v. Kansas University Psychiatry Foundation, Civ. A. No. 83-2094-S
| Decision Date | 20 May 1987 |
| Docket Number | 83-2095-S.,Civ. A. No. 83-2094-S |
| Citation | 671 F. Supp. 1563 |
| Parties | Janice C. BECK, et al., Plaintiffs, v. KANSAS UNIVERSITY PSYCHIATRY FOUNDATION, et al., Defendants. Myrtle A. WILLIAMS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. KANSAS UNIVERSITY PSYCHIATRY FOUNDATION, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Kansas |
John Elliott Shamberg, Lynn R. Johnson, David R. Morris, Ruth M. Benien, Shamberg, Johnson, Bergman & Goldman, Chartered, Overland Park, Kan., for plaintiffs.
Steven L. Ruddick, John C. McFadden, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, Kan., for the State of Kan.
Charles E. Simmons, Chief Legal Counsel, Dept. of Corrections, Robert R. Stephan, Atty. Gen., Leon J. Patton, James D. Hall, David D. Plinsky, Bruce E. Miller, Carl A. Gallagher, Asst. Attys. Gen., Timothy G. Madden, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept. of Corrections, Topeka, Kan., Ronald W. Nelson, Overland Park, Kan., for defendants.
Various defendants in this action have filed motions for summary judgment.
Defendants McManus and Atkins have filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming that the actions taken by Bradley Boan in murdering the plaintiffs' decedents on March 20, 1981, cannot be characterized as actions taken under color of state law by the defendants Patrick McManus and Robert Atkins. The defendants further contend that the actions of McManus and Atkins are not the sort of abusive government conduct that the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment was designed to prevent. The defendants contend that the staff of the Department of Corrections (DOC) fulfilled their function, and any claim that the Department of Corrections did not provide the Kansas Adult Authority (KAA) with all relevant materials should fail. The defendants further claim they are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. The defendants also claim that this action is barred by the eleventh amendment. In addition, the defendants contend that all of Janice Beck's, as representative of Marc Beck's estate, state law causes of action should be barred by the exclusivity of workmen's compensation.
A moving party is entitled to summary judgment only when the evidence indicates that no genuine issue of material fact exists. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Maughan v. SW Servicing, Inc., 758 F.2d 1381, 1387 (10th Cir.1985). An issue of fact is "material" only when the dispute is over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 2509-10, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). The requirement of a "genuine" issue of fact means that the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the non-moving party. Id. Thus, the mere existence of some alleged factual dispute between the parties will not defeat an otherwise properly supported motion for summary judgment. Id. The court must consider factual inferences tending to show triable issues in the light most favorable to the existence of those issues. United States v. O'Block, 788 F.2d 1433, 1435 (10th Cir.1986). The court must also consider the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. Bee v. Greaves, 744 F.2d 1387, 1396 (10th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1214, 105 S.Ct. 1187, 84 L.Ed.2d 334 (1985). The language of Rule 56(a) mandates the entry of summary judgment against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 2552-54, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986).
For purposes of this summary judgment motion, the following facts are uncontroverted:
1. In 1977, Bradley R. Boan plea-bargained to the crime of attempted aggravated assault in violation of K.S.A. §§ 21-3410 and 21-3301.
2. The victim of Boan's attempted aggravated assault was Charles R. Stoffer. Charles Stoffer was a psychiatrist located at Kansas University Medical Center.
3. Boan was sentenced to the custody of the Secretary of Corrections to a term of not less than one, nor more than five years, with his sentence beginning on May 6, 1977.
4. Boan was received by the Department of Corrections on September 7, 1977.
5. Upon his arrival at the penitentiary, Boan began receiving incentive good time at the rate of three days per month until December 1978, when incentive good time was discontinued. He received a total credit of forty-eight days. An inmate's conditional release date was determined by subtracting the amount of good time credit an inmate was entitled to from the inmate's maximum sentence expiration. Bradley Boan's maximum sentence expiration was May 6, 1982.
6. Two types of good time credit were available to Bradley R. Boan between 1977 and 1980 — legislative or statutory good time and incentive good time. An inmate coming into the Kansas State Penitentiary in 1977 under a one to five-year sentence was eligible for two years' legislative good time credit. Boan received this two year statutory good time credit.
7. Incentive good time is awarded to an inmate by the Kansas State Penitentiary Unit Team. The award of incentive good time was based upon an inmate's good behavior, work performance, and conduct. Thus, an inmate had to earn incentive good time. The record indicates that Boan was given not only legislative good time, but forty-eight days incentive good time, thus making Bradley Boan's conditional release date March 18, 1980.
8. Upon the arrival of an inmate's conditional release date, the inmate must be released from confinement. The Kansas Adult Authority has the authority, however, to impose sufficient conditions to protect society from the inmate. The law also allows for a conditional releasee, who breaks the law or violates the conditions of his conditional release, to be returned to prison to serve out his maximum sentence.
9. Bradley Boan had no disciplinary violations while in prison. He was, however, housed in the A & T Segregation at Kansas State Penitentiary from January 29, 1980, to January 31, 1980, for mental problems.
10. Bradley Boan was conditionally released on March 18, 1980. The certificate of conditional release was issued by the Kansas Adult Authority. The Kansas Adult Authority determines whether conditions should be imposed upon conditional releasees. The Kansas State Penitentiary, however, computes the conditional release date. It was the policy of the Kansas Adult Authority in 1980 to impose no conditions on conditional releasees. The institutional staff at the penitentiary and the Department of Corrections knew that it was KAA's policy to impose no special conditions on conditional releasees. The only time the KAA considered placing conditions on a conditional releasee, including supervision, would have been when the imposition of such conditions was recommended to the KAA by the institutional staff of the penitentiary.
11. Every conditional releasee, including Bradley Boan, was required to meet two general conditions: (1) conduct himself in a law abiding manner, and (2) keep the Secretary of Corrections informed of his current address. Conditional releasees who did not obey the law, or whose release became incompatible with the best interests of society, were to be re-taken on a warrant issued by the Secretary of Corrections and re-imprisoned pending a revocation hearing by the KAA.
12. During Boan's incarceration, numerous reports were made concerning his behavior, including his mental condition.
13. The Kansas Adult Authority had complete access to all records maintained by the Department of Corrections, including material from the inmate's file at the penitentiary, and at the central office of the Department of Corrections in Topeka. As a general rule, pre-parole reports would be directly provided to the Kansas Adult Authority. It is uncertain, however, whether all Kansas State Penitentiary records were received by the Kansas Adult Authority or were properly maintained. Generally, pre-parole packets included a Kansas Reception and Diagnostic Center report, progress reports, mental health reports, and prior criminal records.
14. The Department of Corrections was obligated to provide the Kansas Adult Authority with access to all inmates at the Kansas State Penitentiary and all information relevant to the Authority's release decisions concerning those inmates. It was the duty of the Penitentiary's staff to make recommendations and reports concerning an inmate's condition throughout the entire period of the inmate's incarceration, so the information would be available to the Kansas Adult Authority.
15. Arlene Sawyer, Records Clerk III at the penitentiary, would send the Kansas Adult Authority mental health reports as part of her daily routine. The Kansas Adult Authority staff received reports prepared by the penitentiary's mental health unit and would determine whether the report had to be brought to the KAA's board immediately, or whether the report could be reviewed by the board at a later date.
16. Reports, such as the KRDC evaluation, pre-parole reports, special progress reports, progress reports and psychiatric consultations, would be in the central file of the Department of Corrections.
17. Upon Boan's admission into the Department of Corrections, the Kansas State Reception and Diagnostic Center prepared an evaluation summary on him.
18. Between August 18, 1977, and March 18, 1980, numerous psychiatric consultations and pre-parole reports advised the Department of Corrections and the Kansas State Penitentiary personnel that Bradley Boan was a danger and would require supervision and medication, if not involuntary commitment, upon his release. The unit team to the Kansas State Penitentiary was in the best position to observe an inmate and his mental and medical condition on a day-to-day basis. The unit team was concerned that...
To continue reading
Request your trial