Jackson v. Riebold

Decision Date24 February 2016
Docket NumberNo. 14–2775.,14–2775.
Citation815 F.3d 1114
Parties Tony Lanier JACKSON, Plaintiff–Appellant v. Nursing Supervisor RIEBOLD; United States of America, Defendants–Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

D. Brenton (Brent) Dwerlkotte, Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP, Kansas City, MO, argued, for appellant.

Cynthia J. Hyde, Asst. U.S. Atty., Springfield, MO, argued (Tammy Dickinson, U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, on the brief), for appellee.

Before MURPHY, MELLOY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

SMITH

, Circuit Judge.

Tony Lanier Jackson, an inmate incarcerated at the United States Medical Center for Federal Prisoners (USMCFP) in Springfield, Missouri, filed a pro se civil action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971)

, against Nursing Supervisor Shannon Riebold. Jackson alleges that Riebold was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs by failing to respond in a timely manner when the artery comprising Jackson's dialysis access port ruptured. On appeal, Jackson argues that the district court1 erred in (1) granting summary judgment to Riebold on Jackson's deliberate-indifference claim, (2) denying Jackson additional discovery to oppose Riebold's summary-judgment motion, and (3) denying Jackson leave to amend his complaint to include a deliberate-indifference claim against David L. Douglas, PA–C. We affirm.

I. Background

Jackson is a federal inmate who, at the time of the events alleged in his complaint, was incarcerated at the USMCFP in Springfield, Missouri. The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) placed Jackson at the USMCFP because he has end-stage renal disease

, which requires dialysis treatment three times per week. Jackson also has anemia, peripheral neuropathy, and hypertension. In order for Jackson to receive dialysis treatment, he has an arteriovenous (AV) fistula, which is a surgically-created connection between an artery and a vein. The AV fistula enables hemodialysis. Hemodialysis removes a patient's blood, filters it, and returns it to the body. During the relevant time period, Jackson was dialyzing through an AV fistula on his right arm created several years prior. Over time, AV fistulas may become prone to develop a pseudoaneurysm —a pocket of blood created by a leak or a hole in the artery.

On June 11, 2012, Jackson was evaluated for a possible pseudoaneurysm

after the USMCFP staff in the dialysis department reported that he had an enlarged area on his AV fistula. During this evaluation, Jackson informed Douglas, a certified physician's assistant, that the enlarged area on his AV fistula had existed for approximately two weeks. According to Jackson, the AV fistula had " ‘always' been large." Douglas reported "no active bleeding" and that Jackson had stated that the site had "gotten smaller over the past 1 w [ee]k." Douglas counseled Jackson to immediately report any issues that he may have with his dialysis access port because of the potentially serious consequences, including death. Jackson indicated that he understood. Douglas ordered an ultrasound of Jackson's AV fistula to evaluate the pseudoaneurysm for possible repair and ordered mapping to determine the necessity of a new AV fistula for dialysis access. Douglas also advised Jackson "to notify staff if any bleeding occurs" and indicated that he would "make further clinical decisions based on [the ultrasound] results."

Jackson met with the USMCFP's consulting nephrologist on June 11, 2012. In his report (dated June 25, 2012), the nephrologist indicated that Jackson had "developed a very large right forearm pseudoaneurysm

associated with his AV fistula. He will be referred to the surgeon for revision of same."

The ultrasound and mapping were completed on June 19, 2012, and the USMCFP received those results on June 25, 2012. During that time, Jackson continued to receive dialysis treatments with no complications or complaints noted.

On June 28, 2012, Riebold was assigned as the nursing supervisor on the "Morning Watch" shift, which starts at 8:00 p.m. and ends at 8:00 a.m. the following day. Nursing supervisors assigned to this shift are not assigned to one specific area of the USMCFP but instead must cover all areas of the institution and respond to any medical-related issues that may arise during that shift. If a medical emergency arises, nursing supervisors must respond to the emergency, assess the situation, and make decisions related to providing further nursing care, if necessary.

That day, Jackson's pseudoaneurysm

ruptured. Jackson avers that the pseudoaneurysm ruptured at "approximately 9:40 p.m." At that time, Jackson maintains that Unit Officer Gary Jergenson called Riebold from the officers' station. Three inmates—Dusty Cox, Donald Fletcher, and Gregory Weatherall—assisted Jackson following the rupture by wrapping his arm with towels to try and stop the bleeding. According to Cox, Riebold "arrived" at "approximately 10:00[ ]p[.]m[.]" But, according to inmate Donald Fletcher, Riebold had already left from examining Jackson's arm "at around 9:45 p.m. or so." Cox maintains that Riebold "left the unit [at] appro[x]imately 10:03[ ]p[.]m[.]" In any event, Jackson maintains that upon Riebold's arrival, Riebold looked at Jackson's arm; told Jackson, "I'll be back"; and and then departed. According to Jackson, Officer Jergenson called Riebold a second time, and Riebold responded again. Cox avers that this second call occurred "[a]t appro [x]imately 10:45[ ]p[.]m[.]," after he "and inmate Fletcher asked Officer Jergenson what was taking so long." But, according to Fletcher, "[i]t was about 10:35 [p.m.] when [Riebold] returned." Weatherall agrees that Riebold returned "around 10:35 [p.m.] or so." According to Fletcher, Riebold exited the unit with Jackson "at approximately 10:58 p.m.," Jackson entered the ambulance at "11:28 p.m.," and the ambulance departed with Jackson "[a]t about 11:35 [p.m.]" Cox similarly avers that Riebold took Jackson from the unit "[a]t approximately 11:00[ ]p[.]m[.]" Records from the BOP also show that Jackson departed from the USMCFP to the local, outside hospital not later than 11:28 p.m. Riebold likewise entered a note into the BOP's electronic medical record system at 11:30 p.m., indicating that Jackson was taken via ambulance to the hospital.

Upon Jackson's arrival at the hospital, he underwent emergency surgery. The surgery successfully repaired the ruptured fistula

without complication, and Jackson was given a new dialysis access port prior to his discharge from the hospital on July 2, 2012.

Jackson filed a pro se Bivens action against Riebold, alleging a deliberate-indifference claim. Jackson contended that Riebold failed to respond in a timely manner when Jackson's AV fistula

ruptured and that this delay in treatment violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Riebold moved for summary judgment, arguing that (1) sovereign immunity barred Jackson's official-capacity claims, (2) Jackson failed to show a violation of his constitutional rights, and (3) qualified immunity shielded Riebold from personal liability. After Riebold moved for summary judgment, Jackson moved to "dismiss" Riebold's summary-judgment motion or, in the alternative, to stay a ruling on the summary-judgment motion pending further discovery. Jackson wanted to obtain video footage of the incident alleged in his complaint. Riebold replied that, as shown in the declaration of S. Anderson, Special Investigative Agent (SIA) at the USMCFP, no video footage of the alleged incident exists. SIA Anderson averred that events like Jackson's June 28, 2012 medical emergency would not typically be preserved for review by the video surveillance system. SIA Anderson reviewed the retained video files to determine if video footage was stored from the date of the incident and determined that no video footage exists concerning Jackson or the incident. Riebold further argued that discovery was not necessary because Riebold's pending motion hinged on the substantial evidentiary record already produced in the case. Riebold contended that Jackson failed to set forth what additional facts discovery might reveal. The district court denied Jackson's motion to stay a ruling on Riebold's summary-judgment motion and stayed discovery pending its ruling on that motion.

Jackson also moved for leave to file an amended complaint to state new claims against Douglas; specifically, Jackson alleged in his proposed amended complaint that Douglas failed to perform a surgical revision to Jackson's AV fistula

. In his proposed amended complaint, Jackson also restated his allegations against Riebold. In response, Riebold argued that the district court should deny the motion as futile because the existing and proposed complaints contained negligible differences, and the proposed amended complaint did not advance a new claim against Riebold—the only defendant before the court. The district court denied Jackson's motion.

The district court granted summary judgment to Riebold. First, the district court held that sovereign immunity barred Jackson's official-capacity claims against Riebold. Second, as to Jackson's deliberate-indifference claim, the court held that Jackson failed to present any evidence in support of his allegation that Riebold let him bleed for over two hours before calling an ambulance. The court found that the evidence directly contradicted Jackson's allegation because USMCFP records show that Jackson was in transit to the hospital via ambulance within one hour of a medical emergency being announced.2 The court determined that the undisputed facts showed that Riebold immediately responded to the medical emergency announcement and, upon his arrival to Jackson's housing unit, immediately assessed the situation and contacted the medical officer on duty. Once the medical officer and Riebold determined that Jackson needed transport to a local, outside...

To continue reading

Request your trial
169 cases
  • Christopherson v. Bushner
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri
    • April 26, 2021
    ...an amendment, and it may deny a motion to amend based on futility grounds. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962); Jackson v. Riebold, 815 F.3d 1114, 1122 (8th Cir. 2016). "[A]mending is futile if the amended complaint does not meetpleading requirements." Liscomb v. Boyce, 954 F.3d 1151, ......
  • Anderson v. Driskill
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
    • July 26, 2021
    ...to Pl.’s Mot. to Amend (Doc. 53).309 Affidavit re Pl.’s Resp. to Defs.’ Mot. for Summ. J. (Doc. 66) ¶ 10.310 Id.311 Jackson v. Riebold , 815 F.3d 1114, 1121 (8th Cir. 2016).312 Id. (quoting Toben v. Bridgestone Retail Opers., LLC , 751 F.3d 888, 894 (8th Cir. 2014) ).313 Id. (internal citat......
  • Rader v. Ally Fin., Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • January 30, 2020
    ...for discovery." Iverson v. Johnson Gas Appliance Co., 172 F.3d 524, 530 (8th Cir. 1999) (quotation omitted); accord Jackson v. Riebold, 815 F.3d 1114, 1121 (8th Cir. 2016). Thus, "[a]lthough discovery does not have to be completed before a district court can grant summary judgment, summary ......
  • Tuohey ex rel. Wrongful Death Beneficiaries Bryant v. Chenal Healthcare, LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
    • May 17, 2017
    ...this rule is to prevent a party from being unfairly thrown out of court by a premature motion for summary judgment." Jackson v. Riebold, 815 F.3d 1114, 11121 (8th Cir. 2016) (internal quotation omitted). The Court has "wide discretion" to deny a Rule 56(d) request. See Anzaldua v. Ne. Ambul......
  • 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