Frett v. Government of Virgin Islands

Decision Date17 February 1988
Docket NumberNo. 86-3604,86-3604
Citation839 F.2d 968
PartiesAubrey FRETT, Lynn Dickerson, and Clinton David v. GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, Bureau of Corrections, et al. Appeal of GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, Richard A. Schrader, Edwin Potter, and Reuben Smith.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

Godfrey R. de Castro, Acting Atty. Gen., Victor G. Schneider (argued), Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, for appellants.

George H. Hodge, Jr., (argued), St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, for appellee.

Before GIBBONS, Chief Judge, and STAPLETON and MANSMANN, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

GIBBONS, Chief Judge:

The Government of the Virgin Islands, Edwin Potter, Richard Schrader, and Reuben Smith, appeal from a judgment holding them jointly and severally liable to Clinton David for $200,000 in damages for personal injuries. David was an inmate in the Golden Grove Correctional Institution, St. Croix, United States Virgin Islands, when on February 7, 1983 he was stabbed by Angel Soto, a fellow inmate. Richard Schrader, the warden of that facility, and corrections officer Reuben Smith, were on duty at Golden Grove at the time of the incidents leading up to the stabbing. Edwin Potter is the Director of Prison Institutions who permitted Angel Soto to remain in the general prison population at Golden Grove. These defendants, all represented by the Attorney General of the Virgin Islands, contend that the District Court of the Virgin Islands erred in denying their motions for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict. We will affirm.

I. The Pleadings

This action was originally filed on behalf of three Golden Grove inmates who were injured by allegedly aggressive, antisocial inmates who were permitted to remain in the general prison population despite patterns of conduct suggesting the need for their isolation in order to prevent injury to fellow inmates. The complaint was dismissed for lack of prosecution by Aubrey Frett and Lynn Dickerson, but the case of Clinton David proceeded to trial. The factual allegations with respect to David are as follows:

7. That on or about February 7, 1983, Angel Soto, a fellow inmate, threatened to burst open the head of Plaintiff Clinton A. David, with a rock following a disturbance at the prison cafeteria in Golden Grove, St. Croix.

8. That when Clinton A. David left the cafeteria, around 4:00 o'clock P.M. on said date, Angel Soto did in fact hit Plaintiff with a rock against the back of his head.

9. That Correction Officer Lt. Reuben Smith grabbed Clinton A. David and took away a stick from him, which he picked up to defend himself against Angel Soto.

10. That Angel Soto was also seen with a knife in his hand and ran off when Correction Officer, Martin Heywood requested the knife from him.

11. That the Warden, Richard Schrader, witnessed the incident, but failed to take aggressive measures to retrieve said weapon from Angel Soto.

12. That Clinton A. David proceeded to the restroom in the cafeteria to wash the blood off his head wound.

13. That while Clinton A. David was washing his wound with his back turned to the door, Angel Soto stabbed him five (5) times in the back with a knife having a blade approximately 5- 1/2 inches in length and 2 inches in width.

14. That Clinton A. David fell to the ground and Angel Soto began beating him viciously with his fists.

15. That Clinton A. David was immediately taken to the Community Hospital in Christiansted, St. Croix, where he was placed on the critical list for over a week.

16. That the Correction Officers finally took aggressive measures to retrieve the knife from Angel Soto only after the stabbing incident.

17. That if Lt. Reuben Smith and the Warden, Richard Schrader, had seized Angel Soto, rather than Clinton A. David, the incident could have been avoided.

* * *

* * *

24. That the Governor of the United States Virgin Islands, Juan Luis, the Commissioner of Public Safety, Otis Felix, and the Director of the Prison Institution, Edwin Potter, have promulgated rules and regulations for the Bureau of Corrections in St. Croix resulting in an egregious failure to protect the Plaintiffs and other inmates.

25. That the Bureau of Corrections' Rules and Regulations forbid the use of firearms within the perimeter of the prison.

26. That the Correction Officers have established a custom of failing to assist or protect the inmates in order to safeguard their own health, safety and welfare.

27. That the Government of the Virgin Islands, Bureau of Corrections, Governor Juan Luis, Otis Felix and Edwin Potter knew or ought to have known of the conditions that exist at the prison in Golden Grove, Christiansted, St. Croix, from the number of incidents they have documented in their files.

28. That the reckless indifference of all the above named Defendants is the proximate cause of Plaintiffs' injuries.

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. The jurisdictional allegation relies on section 22 of the Revised Organic Act of 1954, 48 U.S.C. Sec. 1612, which confers general original civil jurisdiction on the District Court of the Virgin Islands when the matter in controversy exceeds $500. Thus, although the complaint relies on 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983, its factual allegations must also be considered in light of the territorial law of the Virgin Islands.

The first responsive pleading was a motion on behalf of the Government of the Virgin Islands to dismiss David's claim because David failed to comply with the notice of claim provisions of the Virgin Islands Tort Claims Act. See 33 V.I.Code Ann. Secs. 3401 et seq., Sec. 3409 (Equity Supp.1986) (Tort Claims Act). David responded by filing affidavits establishing that he had filed with the government an untimely notice of intention to file claim, and suggesting reasons why the late filing should be excused. No opposing affidavits were filed, and the district court ruled that David had demonstrated "reasonable excuse" within the meaning of 33 V.I.C. Sec. 3409(c) for the failure to file his notice of claim within 90 days. The defendants do not on appeal contest that ruling.

Following discovery, the parties entered into a stipulation of facts as follows:

1. The plaintiffs are citizens of the United States of America and residents of St. Thomas, United States Virgin Islands.

2. The defendants were duly appointed, employed, elected public officials and employees of a municipal corporation or governmental subdivision of this United States Virgin Islands.

3. The defendants are also residents of the United States Virgin Islands.

4. This action arises under the United States Constitution, particularly under the provisions of the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and under federal law, particularly the Civil Rights Act, Title 42 of the United States Code, Section 1983.

5. On February 7, 1983 the plaintiff Clifton David was stabbed five (5) times in his back by another inmate known as Angel Soto following an altercation between them.

6. Plaintiff David was rushed to the emergency room at the St. Croix Hospital and was assigned to the Intensive Care Unit where his condition remained critical.

7. Angel Soto stabbed him with a knife having a blade of approximately 5 1/2 inches in length and 2 inches in width.

8. Angel Soto and Plaintiffs were at all time pertinent to this civil action under the exclusive care, custody and control of the named defendants.

Thus, the fact of David's injury, the official positions of the individual defendants, and their exclusive custody of Soto and David were not in issue.

II. Proceedings in the Trial Court

The case went to trial on the issue of liability of the Government of the Virgin Islands and the individually named defendants for damages caused by Soto's assault and battery. The stipulation of facts was marked in evidence and read to the jury. David also placed in evidence 20 other exhibits, and presented the testimony of five witnesses including a Golden Grove record keeper and the defendants, Smith and Potter.

The exhibits include 19 incident reports and letters over a two year period with respect to Angel Soto involving threats to guards and inmates, assaults on guards and inmates, theft from other inmates, failure to make the inmate count on time, arson in a cell, and possession of weapons, including pipes, knives, and a part of a scissors. Some of these incidents resulted in the hospitalization of inmates. Many of these incident reports were referred to hearing committees. Some of the committee reports resulted in extended periods of "lockdown" for Soto. Several inmate complaints of assaults by Soto also resulted in Soto's immediate lockdown. One incident report of a weapons possession resulted in Soto's use of an iron bar to burst out of his cell after he had been locked down. At least one assault by Soto on a fellow prisoner caused that prisoner to lose consciousness.

These several incident reports are business records of the Bureau of Corrections. Some are addressed to Warden Schrader himself. Among them is a report of June 24, 1982, of an arson and an assault on a guard in which Samuel Garrett, Chief Corrections Officer, reported:

This inmate [Soto] is very dangerous, willful and vicious. The behavior of Inmate Soto should not be taken slightly in light of his current actions. Inmate Soto continues to boast that he done fuck up two guards already and he will fuck up as much as he can again.

It was only hours before this incident occur that I heard Soto saying he don't give a fuck and that he will make blood run again.

(Exhibit D19). From these exhibits the jury could conclude that Angel Soto was an extremely short tempered, dangerous, antisocial person who posed a serious risk of harm to other persons exposed to his company, and that many persons in charge of the Golden Grove prison were fully aware of that risk.

David testified that on February...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Ngiraingas v. Sanchez
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • April 24, 1990
    ...and to consider whether the individual officers were entitled to qualified immunity. 858 F.2d, at 1374. 4. See Frett v. Government of Virgin Islands, 839 F.2d 968 (CA3 1988) (Government of Virgin Islands is subject to same liability under § 1983 as any other governmental entity). See also F......
  • Handley v. Phillips
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania
    • June 9, 1989
    ...838 F.2d 663, 671 (3d Cir. 1988); Hampton v. Holmesburg Prison Officials, 546 F.2d 1077 (3d Cir.1976); Frett v. Government of the Virgin Islands, 839 F.2d 968, 977 n. 4 (3d Cir.1988); Talbert v. Kelly, 799 F.2d 62, 66 (3d Cir. Although we can not agree with the Plaintiffs' assertion that "D......
  • Young v. Quinlan
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • June 3, 1991
    ...officials have displayed 'deliberate indifference' to the danger." 777 F.2d at 147 (citations omitted); cf. Frett v. Government of Virgin Islands, 839 F.2d 968, 978 (3d Cir.1988) (knowledge of prisoner's extremely dangerous propensities and failure to protect others from that prisoner suffi......
  • Salazar v. Collins
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • February 27, 2008
    ...accord Cortes Quinones v. Jimenez-Nettleship, 773 F.2d 10, 15 (1st Cir.1985) (applying law of Puerto Rico); Frett v. Virgin Islands, 839 F.2d 968, 975-76 (3d Cir.1988) (applying law of Virgin Islands), overruled in part on other grounds by Ngiraingas v. Sanchez, 495 U.S. 182, 110 S.Ct. 1737......
  • 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