Fant v. Fisher, CIV-75-1051-D.

Decision Date12 April 1976
Docket NumberNo. CIV-75-1051-D.,CIV-75-1051-D.
Citation414 F. Supp. 807
CourtU.S. District Court — Western District of Oklahoma
PartiesJohn Henry FANT, # 88580, Plaintiff, v. Curtis FISHER, Superintendent, Enid Community Treatment Center, and Lee Semones, Employment Counselor, Defendants.

John Henry Fant, pro se.

Larry Derryberry, Atty. Gen. of Oklahoma by Amalija J. Hodgins, Asst. Atty. Gen., Oklahoma City, Okl., for both defendants.

ORDER

DAUGHERTY, Chief Judge.

This cause comes before the court on defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Motion to Dismiss. The plaintiff is a prisoner incarcerated by the State of Oklahoma at the Enid Community Treatment Center, Enid, Oklahoma. He seeks relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343 for deprivation, under color of state law, of rights allegedly secured by the federal Constitution.

Both parties agree that the Complaint does not present any issue concerning the denial of adequate medical or dental care in violation of the 8th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. Stated in plaintiff's own words "the question is raised as to whether a trusty inmate was to be required to pay for his own medical care, while other trusty inmates at the same penal institution were provided free medical care." (Plaintiff's Response p. 2.) The plaintiff admits, however, that other trusty inmates have had to pay for their medical care at the Center.

It would further appear that there is no dispute between the parties to the following facts: Defendant Curtis Fisher is the Superintendent at the Enid Community Treatment Center. Defendant Lee Semones is the Employment Counselor at the Enid Community Treatment Center. The plaintiff was transferred to the Center on March 10, 1975 in trusty status. During the times pertinent to his Complaint plaintiff was assigned a job as cook at the Center and paid the sum of $30.00 a month. In September, 1975, the plaintiff was permitted by the defendants to enroll at the O. T. Autry Vocational Technical Center in Enid at his own expense. As a student he received Veterans Administration Educational Benefits in the amount of $270.00 per month. Since as an inmate he was receiving free room and board, the only expense of the plaintiff, except for voluntary expenditures for personal items, was $75.00 tuition paid every nine weeks. The plaintiff is the only trusty presently incarcerated in the Center who is permitted to attend school. In September, 1975, the plaintiff was provided dental care by a local dentist who charged $112.00 for his services. This bill was originally paid by the Center which was later reimbursed by the plaintiff. In October and November, 1975, the Center incurred additional expense for dental care for the plaintiff in the amount of $116.00. The plaintiff paid $71.00 of this amount and the Center $45.00.

On these facts, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover. The court cannot accept plaintiff's claim that he is absolutely entitled to free medical services. So long as free medical services may not be demanded of the State as a right by its free citizens, it is unreasonable to suggest that such free services may be demanded by a convicted felon. Persons convicted of felonies do not acquire by virtue of their convictions a constitutional right to services and benefits that are not available as of right to persons never convicted of criminal offenses. James v. Wallace, 382 F.Supp. 1177 (M.D.Ala.1974). Failure by the State to provide urgently needed medical attention to a prisoner may amount to cruel and unusual punishment. Dewell v. Lawson, 489 F.2d 877 (CA10 1974). In Coppinger v. Townsend, 398 F.2d 392, 394 (CA10 1968) the court defined the State's obligation:

"The prisoner's
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • United States v. French
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Oklahoma
    • May 5, 1976
  • Godlewski v. Rizzo
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
    • February 8, 1984
    ... ... 1976); ... Smith v. Thomas, 475 F.Supp. 1135 (E.D. Ark. 1979); ... Fant v. Fisher, 414 F.Supp. 807 (W.D. Oklahoma ... 1976). Our review of the record in the matter sub ... ...
  • Nicholson v. Choctaw County, Ala., Civ.A.No. 78-407-P.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Alabama
    • September 25, 1980
    ...and a person does not gain a greater right to services or benefits upon being convicted of a criminal offense. Fant v. Fisher, 414 F.Supp. 807, 808 (W.D. Okl.1976); cf. James v. Wallace, 382 F.Supp. 1177, 1180 (M.D.Ala.1974) (right to rehabilitative services County jails hold prisoners for ......
  • Ennis v. Dasovick
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • September 9, 1993
    ...as one in mandamus (to compel the doing of an act) under Chapter 32-34, N.D.C.C., there is no clear right of relief in this case. Fant, supra, at 808-809. * * * * * "The second issue raised is Mr. Ennis' request for court-appointed counsel. That request is denied as being outside the consti......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT