Fearon v. Commonwealth of Virginia, Civ. A. No. 74-C-57-H.
| Decision Date | 11 September 1974 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 74-C-57-H. |
| Citation | 383 F. Supp. 542 |
| Parties | Joseph F. FEARON, Petitioner, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA et al., Respondents. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Virginia |
Stuart Bateman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Richmond, Va., for respondents.
The court has before it a complaint by Joseph F. Fearon, an inmate at Correctional Unit No. 7, White Post, Virginia. Joseph F. Fearon prays for injunctive relief and compensatory damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Jurisdiction is conferred upon this court by 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3) and (4).
Petitioner is suing Mr. Jack Davis, Director of the Department of Corrections, Dr. William Wingfield, Medical Director of the Department of Corrections, and Dr. David Pollack, Assistant Medical Director for the Department of Corrections. The complaint alleges that petitioner was injured during an altercation among inmates which was not stopped by three correctional officers who observed the altercation. As a result of the fighting, petitioner subsequently went to the Penitentiary Hospital and was treated by Dr. David Pollack who examined the wound and ordered his aid to sew up the arm. Petitioner alleges that was inadequate and has resulted in his losing partial use of his left hand.
Respondents have filed affidavits by Boyce T. George, a correctional officer who witnessed the altercation, Dr. David Pollack, and Dr. John F. Kendrick, who treated petitioner subsequently to Dr. Pollack. Respondents have also moved for summary judgment. Petitioner, although given ample time to respond to the affidavits has failed to do so.
Suits under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 are not intended to redress instances of common law negligence and there is no right to recovery from the unintentional invasion of the private right of the prisoner to be protected from physical harm. Penn v. Oliver, 351 F.Supp. 1292 (E.D. Va.1972). An isolated act or omission by a prison official that allows an attack to occur and which involves only simple negligence does not, absent special circumstances, create a constitutional deprivation over which this court has jurisdiction.
As to the medical treatment received by petitioner, both affidavits by Dr. David Pollack and Dr. John F. Kendrick indicate that adequate medical treatment was provided petitioner, although not ultimately successful. However, the lack of success of medical treatment does not raise a constitutional claim. Even if...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wells v. Valencia County
...Piphus, supra. Not all tortious conduct amounts to a constitutional deprivation. Id.; Parratt v. Taylor, supra; Fearon v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 383 F.Supp. 542 (W.D.Va.1974). As more particularly applied to this case, not all tortious conduct subject to liability under state law amounts......