Corring v. Pearl River Cnty.
| Decision Date | 04 February 2013 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:11cv262-RHW |
| Parties | DANIEL GEORGE CORRING PLAINTIFF v. PEARL RIVER COUNTY and RITA LUMPKIN DEFENDANTS |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Mississippi |
Before the Court are [109] and [115] the respective motions to dismiss or for summary judgment filed by Rita Lumpkin and Pearl River County in this pro se prisoner lawsuit filed by Daniel George Corring July 11, 2011, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. Corring filed responses to the motions [119] and [120],1 Defendants filed their respective replies [123] and 125], and the matter is ripe for ruling. All parties have consented to the exercise of jurisdiction by the United States Magistrate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and FED.R.CIV.P. 73, and the case has been reassigned to the undersigned for all further proceedings. [82], [83]
Daniel Corring was arrested April 18, 2008 by Waveland Police Department for armed robbery and two counts of kidnaping in Hancock County. After the Hancock County Jail was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Hancock County arranged for other nearby counties to house its pre-trial detainees, and Corring was taken initially to Pearl River County Jail, where he remained until he was transferred to Marion County Jail on November 3, 2010. He wasultimately convicted of the armed robbery and kidnaping charges in Hancock County and sentenced to serve a total of thirty years for the convictions. The Mississippi Department of Corrections shows he is presently housed at the South Mississippi Correctional Institution at Leakesville, Mississippi, and that his tentative release date is April 11, 2038. Corring alleges the Defendants violated his constitutional rights during his incarceration in the Pearl River County Jail from the date of his arrest until some time in 2009. In particular, Plaintiff alleges Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs.
Some time before Corring committed the crimes for which he is incarcerated, he shot himself in his right leg. Although no specific date for the injury is given, Corring testified it happened some three months or more before he was arrested.2 He testified he went to the hospital in Bay St. Louis and also saw a private surgeon for the injury when it occurred; that they washed it off, x-rayed it and told him the bullet went through his leg but there was clothing in the wound. According to Corring, these otherwise unidentified medical personnel told him the clothing should work its way out, and that if it had not healed in three months, he should return and have the clothing removed. Corring sought no other treatment for the injury before committing the armed robbery and kidnaping and being put in jail. [122-2, pp. 18-24, 32-33], [115-1, p. 18]
For several months following his incarceration, Corring made no complaint about his leg, although he did make numerous requests for medical attention for various other complaints including headaches (May 3, 2008); warts or pimples on his penis (May 29, 2008); arm pain (June 13, 2008 and August 3, 2008); requests for testing for HIV and AIDS, concerns that he may have cancer, requests for an abdominal x-ray as he thought he may have tapeworms orheartworms, and complaints of difficult bowel movements (July 8, 2008);3 requests that he be taken off the no-pork diet4 (July 14, 2008, July 19, 2008, July 21, 2008); strange marks on body, needs to talk to someone, needs some garlic, thinks fellow inmates are doing voodoo on him (July 30, 2008); "evil voodoo s**t" trying to kill him (August 5, 2008); and problems with his testicles (August 27, 2008, September 4, 2008, and September 9, 2008). [122, pp. 127, 124-5, 113]. All those complaints were promptly addressed by the medical department. [122, pp. 107-111, 113-120, 127] Corring concedes that when he submitted a sick call request to see a nurse, he got to see a nurse. [122-2, p. 197]
Corring admittedly submitted only two medical request slips regarding his leg. [122-2, p. 199] Although his medical intake assessment noted the pre-existing gunshot wound, Corring did not complain about the leg until some five months after arriving at Pearl River County Jail. On September 14, 2008, he submitted a medical request stating he needed to see the doctor about a hole on his leg, that the bullet wound had "re-opened." Nursing staff responded to this medical request the next day, noted an approximately .5cm round area, questioned possible staph although the area was not reddened, and established a course of action including wound care and monitoring for infection. [122, p. 112] Corring's next complaint about the leg was an undated medical request complaining his leg was swollen, that there was "clothing inside leg lodged next to artery worried about a blood infection." The October 20, 2008 response, notes the complaints of leg pain, records findings of no discharge and increased tenderness, and orders antibiotic ointment twice daily with instructions to Corring to keep his hands off the wound. [122, p. 123] The final entry in Corring's records which mentions the leg was on December 29, 2008. On that date Corring was found shaking, unable to state his name or follow commands, and appearing not to comprehend, for which jail staff sent him to the hospital emergency room for evaluation of his confused state. [122, pp. 121-122] Corring arrived at Highland Community Hospital at 11:03 a.m. with a chief complaint of "altered mental status,"5 and was admitted at 2:54 p.m. with a diagnosis of hyponatremia (low sodium). Additional admitting diagnoses were: hypokalemia (low potassium), water intoxication,6 confusion, and an "incidental finding" of abscess to the right thigh. [122-1, pp. 7-8, 18], [115-1, p. 22] As he was questioned about his medical history, Corring showed the doctor a wound on his right thigh about one-half inch round and scabbed. When Corring picked the scab off and pinched the area, drainage came out. The area was cleaned and a dressing applied. [122-1, p. 69] The admitting physician's plan of care included starting Corring on saline, replacing potassium by mouth and IV supplement, starting him on antibiotics, and having a surgery consultation for excision of the abscess cavity on his thigh. [122-1, p. 22] The procedure was performed December 30, 2008 without incident [122-1, p. 31], and Corring was discharged from the hospital the same day, with a prescription for a week-long course of Bactrim, instructions that the dressing on the leg be changed daily, and instructions that Corring limit his water intake. [122-1, pp. 24, 53] Although Corring testified in the omnibus hearing that he thought he had gangrene, there is nothing in his prison or medical records to so indicate, and he has produced no medical evidence to substantiate the claim. Gram stain culture from the right thigh abscess area revealed no organisms. [122-1, p. 178] Corring's records contain no further complaint about his leg.
Although Corring also complains he was not timely treated for psychological problems or difficult or painful bowel movements after he was put in jail. However, he admits he was neither under psychiatric care nor on psychiatric medications when he was arrested; he testified he had received no treatment for psychological problems since he was a child, and that he discontinued that treatment because it was his choice. [122-2, pp. 44, 106-109] Corring's records show he was counseled by nurses, and that his psychological issues at Pearl River County were addressed with prescribed medications and counseling by therapist Trent Davis. His records further reflect that his complaints of difficult or painful bowel movements were treated with fiber powder and metamucil. His records show he sometimes received these substances on a daily basis. [122, pp. 66-68, 70, 117, 128, 185]
Under Rule 56, FED.R.CIV.P., a motion for summary judgment shall be granted "if the movant shows there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." A material fact is one that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law; a genuine dispute exists when the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the non-moving party. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). On a motion for summary judgment, the Court views the evidence and draws reasonable inferences most favorable to the non-moving party. Abarca v. Metropolitan Transit Authority, 404 F.3d 938, 940 (5th Cir. 2005).
The party who bears the burden of proof at trial also bears the burden of proof at the summary judgment stage. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-323 (1986). One seeking summary judgment bears the initial burden of identifying those portions of the pleadings and discovery on file, and any affidavits, which he believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Id., at 325. If the movant fails to show the absence of a genuine issueconcerning any material fact, summary judgment must be denied, even if the non-movant has not responded to the motion. John v. State of Louisiana, 757 F.2d 698, 708 (5th Cir. 1985). If the movant carries his burden, the burden shifts to the non-movant to show that summary judgment should not be granted. Celotex, 477 U.S. at 324-325. The non-movant may not rest upon mere allegations or denials, but must set forth specific facts showing there is a genuine issue for trial.
Reta Lumpkin was a nurse practitioner who provided medical care at the Pearl River County Jail while Corring was incarcerated there. Corring's complaint against her appears to allege not only deliberate indifference to his medical needs, but also medical negligence. Lumpkin asserts Corring is statutorily barred from pursuing the negligence claim because he...
To continue reading
Request your trial