Hall v. Maryland

Decision Date22 September 2020
Docket NumberCivil Action No. RDB-19-3005
PartiesLORETTA LYNN HALL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF MARYLAND, et al., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Maryland
MEMORANDUM OPINION

This case arises from the October 10, 2016 murder of Benjamin Andrew Hall ("Decedent" or "Mr. Hall"), an inmate at Maryland Correctional Institution - Hagerstown ("MCIH") by his cellmate Mark Andrew Topper ("Mr. Topper"). Plaintiffs Loretta Lynn Hall ("Ms. Hall"), the Decedent's mother and the personal representative of the Estate of Benjamin Andrew Hall, and Decedent's three minor children, "LD," "IB," and "OH" (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), instituted this action in the Circuit Court for Washington County, Maryland. Named Defendants are: the State of Maryland, the former Secretary of the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services Stephen T. Moyer ("Secretary Moyer"), the Warden of MCIH Denise Gelsinger ("Warden Gelsinger"), the Assistant Warden of MCIH Keith Lyons ("Assistant Warden Lyons"), Lieutenant Steve Thomas ("Lt. Thomas"), Lieutenant Ryan Sullivan ("Lt. Sullivan"), Sergeant Bradley Rose ("Sgt. Rose"), and Correctional Officers Cody Nelling ("CO Nelling"), Dean Vosburgh ("CO Vosburgh"), Eric Fischer ("CO Fischer"), and Ronald Jackson ("CO Jackson") (collectively, "Defendants"). Plaintiffs assert federal constitutional claims against the individual Defendants (Count I), state constitutional claims against all Defendants (Count II), and state law claims for wrongful death (Count III) and survivorship (Count IV) against all Defendants. (Compl., ECF No. 1-2.) Based upon the federal constitutional claims, Defendants timely removed the case to this Court. (Notice of Removal, ECF No. 1.)

Presently pending is Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 37.) The parties' submissions have been reviewed, and no hearing is necessary. See Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md. 2018). For the reasons that follow, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 37) shall be GRANTED. Specifically, Count I, setting forth federal constitutional claims, will be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE with respect to the individual Defendants; Counts II, III, and IV, asserting state claims, will be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to the Defendant State of Maryland; and Counts II, III, and IV will be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to the individual Defendants.

BACKGROUND

In ruling on a motion to dismiss, this Court "accept[s] as true all well-pleaded facts in a complaint and construe[s] them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff." Wikimedia Found. v. Nat'l Sec. Agency, 857 F.3d 193, 208 (4th Cir. 2017) (citing SD3, LLC v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc., 801 F.3d 412, 422 (4th Cir. 2015)). The Court may consider only such sources outside the complaint that are, in effect, deemed to be part of the complaint, for example, documents incorporated into the complaint by reference and matters of which a court may take judicial notice. Sec'y of State for Defence v. Trimble Navigation Ltd., 484 F.3d 700, 705 (4th Cir. 2007).

In 2013, Decedent Benjamin Andrew Hall was convicted in Maryland state court of theft and was sentenced to seven years' incarceration. (Compl. ¶ 19, ECF No. 1-2.) Mr. Hallbegan his incarceration at Eastern Correctional Institution ("ECI") at the age of 23. (Id. ¶ 20.) Plaintiffs allege that, shortly into Mr. Hall's incarceration at ECI, he was attacked by another inmate, alleged to be African-American. (Id. ¶ 22.) Following the attack, Plaintiffs allege that the Aryan Brotherhood ("AB"), a "neo-Nazi prison gang and organized crime syndicate," offered security and protection to Mr. Hall, who was White. (Id.) On or about December 12, 2015, Mr. Hall was transferred to the Jessup Correctional Institution ("JCI"). (Id. ¶ 23.) On or about August 11, 2016, Mr. Hall was again transferred to the Maryland Correctional Institution - Hagerstown ("MCIH"). (Id. ¶ 25.)

On or about August 14, 2016, Plaintiffs allege that members of the AB fatally stabbed a member of the AB's rival gang inside the Jessup Correctional Institution. (Id. ¶¶ 27-30.) Plaintiffs allege that Mr. Hall told his mother, Plaintiff Ms. Hall, that he knew who was responsible for the murder, that members of the AB believed Mr. Hall was cooperating with the authorities investigating the murder, and that the AB members wanted Mr. Hall killed "because they believed him to be a 'snitch.'" (Id. ¶ 56.) Plaintiffs allege that Ms. Hall left voicemails for Warden Gelsinger and the Chaplain at MCIH, but that Warden Gelsinger never returned Ms. Hall's calls. (Id. ¶¶ 57-58.)

On or about August 15, 2016, Mr. Hall was placed in administrative segregation "due to concerns for his safety" because Plaintiffs allege that "MCIH determined there was to be no contact between members of the [Aryan Brotherhood]" and its rival gang. (Id. ¶¶ 31-33.) On or about August 19, 2016, Mr. Hall was allegedly attacked and injured by members of the rival gang in the presence of MCIH correctional officers while he was handcuffed. (Id. ¶ 34.) Plaintiffs allege that Mr. Hall submitted an administrative grievance about the attack,"complain[ing] in his grievance that he was struck in the shoulder by 'some kind of steele [sic] inside of a sock' and was denied medical care." (Id. ¶¶ 35-42.) Mr. Hall's grievance was allegedly dismissed "for 'procedural reasons'" and he "was instructed to resubmit his grievance by October 14[, 2016] with additional information." (Id. ¶¶ 40-41.) Mr. Hall did not resubmit a grievance prior to his death. (Id. ¶ 42.)

Plaintiffs allege that another inmate, Mark Andrew Topper ("Mr. Topper"), became Mr. Hall's cellmate on either August 19, 2016 or September 22, 2016. (Id. ¶¶ 44-46.) Mr. Hall allegedly refused various potential cellmates "because they were 'not one of [his],'" but that Mr. Hall "agreed for Mr. Topper to move in" with him. (Id. ¶¶ 46-48.) Mr. Hall allegedly told his mother about Mr. Topper's placement in his cell, that he believed Mr. Topper was "prospecting" with the Aryan Brotherhood, and that Warden Gelsinger told Mr. Hall that Mr. Topper would be placed in his cell "temporarily." (Id. ¶¶ 49-50.) Plaintiffs also allege that Mr. Topper was not a member of or affiliated with any gangs but that he had been assigned to disciplinary segregation. (Id. ¶ 52.)

On or about October 2, 2016, Mr. Hall allegedly called his mother and told her that he had intercepted a message passed amongst inmates that the Aryan Brotherhood "had ordered a hit" on Mr. Hall and that Mr. Topper was planning to kill him to get initiated into the Aryan Brotherhood. (Id. ¶¶ 54-55, 59.) Plaintiffs allege that this telephone call was terminated by MCIH, "indicating officials were listening to their conversation and...overheard Decedent's fears that Mr. Topper would kill him." (Id. ¶ 59.)

On the night of October 10, 2016, Mr. Hall and Mr. Topper were allegedly drinking alcohol in their cell and each drank at least four cups of alcohol. (Id. ¶¶ 60-61.) Plaintiffsallege that Defendant Correctional Officer Nelling ("CO Nelling") had conducted a scheduled tier walk at 10:00 p.m. and that Mr. Hall and Mr. Topper were "alive and fine" at that time. (Id. ¶ 68.) Subsequently, Mr. Hall and Mr. Topper allegedly got into an argument when Mr. Hall started "'running his mouth' about 'his brothers.'" (Id. ¶¶ 61-62.) Mr. Hall allegedly put his hands in Mr. Topper's face and Mr. Topper pushed Mr. Hall away. (Id. ¶ 63.) Mr. Hall then punched Mr. Topper in the face, knocking Mr. Topper's tooth out. (Id. ¶ 64.) According to Plaintiffs, by Mr. Topper's own account, Mr. Topper "went 'berserk' and used his hands and feet to beat Decedent to death." (Id. ¶ 65.) At approximately 10:30 p.m., during his next scheduled tier walk, CO Nelling discovered Mr. Hall lying chest up in a large puddle of blood with a bloody white t-shirt covering his face and Mr. Topper standing over Mr. Hall's body. (Id. ¶ 66.) Upon this discovery, CO Nelling radioed for backup, medical personnel were called, and the nurse "responded immediately and confirmed [Mr. Hall] was dead." (Id. ¶¶ 69-70.) Meanwhile, Mr. Topper, "intoxicated" and "wearing boots and a fresh shirt," was allegedly cuffed and removed from the cell. (Id. ¶¶ 71-72.)

Plaintiffs allege that Mr. Topper reported to the authorities that he had hit Mr. Hall, slammed him against the wall, and held him down, "stomping his head, throat, and chest," until Mr. Hall stopped breathing. (Id. ¶ 76.) Mr. Topper also allegedly used a sharpened scrabble piece during the attack which he flushed down the toilet before CO Nelling arrived. (Id.) The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner performed an autopsy on Mr. Hall, concluding that the manner of death was homicide and that the time of injury was 10:00 p.m. on the evening of October 10, 2016. (Id. ¶¶ 77-78.)

On September 13, 2019, Plaintiffs filed this action in the Circuit Court for Washington County, Maryland. (ECF No. 1-2.) Based on the federal constitutional claims asserted in Count I, Defendants removed the case to this Court on October 15, 2019. (ECF No. 1.) Defendants subsequently filed the presently pending Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 37.)

STANDARD OF REVIEW

A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is governed by Rule 12(b)(6), which authorizes the dismissal of a complaint if it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). The purpose of Rule 12(b)(6) is "to test the sufficiency of a complaint and not to resolve contests surrounding the facts, the merits of a claim, or the applicability of defenses." Presley v. City of Charlottesville, 464 F.3d 480, 483 (4th Cir. 2006); see also Goines v. Valley Cmty. Servs. Bd., 822 F.3d 159, 165-66 (4th Cir. 2016). The sufficiency of a complaint is assessed by reference to the pleading requirements of Rule 8(a)(2), which provides that a complaint must contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). To survive...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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