Ruble v. King

• Decision Date: 18 September 1995
• Docket Number: Civil No. 1:93-CV-1024-JEC.
• Citation: 911 F. Supp. 1544
• Parties: Timothy L. RUBLE, and Charles B. Anderson, Plaintiffs, v. Lieutenant KING, Lieutenant Mills, Officer Ashford, Officer Burke, Officer Mills, Officer Jones and Four Unknown Correctional Officers, in their respective individual and official capacities, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia

911 F. Supp. 1544

Timothy L. RUBLE, and Charles B. Anderson, Plaintiffs, v. Lieutenant KING, Lieutenant Mills, Officer Ashford, Officer Burke, Officer Mills, Officer Jones and Four Unknown Correctional Officers, in their respective individual and official capacities, Defendants.

Civil No. 1:93-CV-1024-JEC.

United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division.

September 18, 1995.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Steven Paul Berne, Office of Steven Paul Berne, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiffs.

Millard C. Farmer, Jr., Office of Millard C. Farmer, Jr., Atlanta, GA, Frank L. Derrickson, Office of Frank L. Derrickson, Decatur, GA, for Defendants.

ORDER

CARNES, District Judge.

This case is presently before the Court on Defendant King's Motion for Summary Judgment 49, Defendants Ashford, Burke, C. Mills, D. Mills' Motion for Summary Judgment 55 and Defendant Jones' Motion for Summary Judgment 75. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below, concludes that Defendant King's Motion for Summary Judgment 49 is granted in part and denied in part. Defendants Ashford, Burke, C. Mills, D. Mills' Motion for Summary Judgment 55 is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant Jones' Motion for Summary Judgment 75 is granted in part and denied in part.

BACKGROUND

At the time of the events in question, plaintiffs were inmates at the United States Penitentiary in Atlanta, Georgia (hereinafter "USP-Atlanta"). Defendants King, Denise Mills (hereinafter "D. Mills"), Ashford, Burke, M.A. Jones,¹ and Cedric Mills (hereinafter "C. Mills") were all employed by the federal government at the United States Penitentiary. Defendants unknown correctional officers one through four were also employed by the federal government as correctional officers at the United States Penitentiary. Defendant King was a Lieutenant and the supervisor at USP-Atlanta on the date of the incident that is the subject of this litigation. (Aff. of King,² at ¶ 1.) Defendant D. Mills is currently a Captain in the Federal Bureau of Prisons; however, at the time of the events in question in this case, she was a Lieutenant at USP-Atlanta. (Dec. of D. Mills,³ at ¶¶ 1, 3.) Defendant Burke is currently a Senior Officer Specialist in the Federal Bureau of Prisons; however, at the time of the events in question, he was a Corrections Officer at USP-Atlanta. (Dec. of Burke, at ¶¶ 1, 3.) Defendant C. Mills was a Recreation Specialist in the Federal Bureau of Prisons at the time of the events in question and still holds that position. (Dec. of C. Mills, at ¶¶ 1, 3.) Defendant Ashford was a Senior Officer Specialist at the Federal Bureau of Prisons and still holds that position. (Dec. of Ashford, at ¶¶ 1, 3.) Defendant Jones was a Correctional Officer in the Federal Bureau of Prisons at the time of the events in question and still holds that position. (Dec. of Jones,⁴ at ¶ 1.)

On January 23, 1993, plaintiffs Anderson and Ruble were both housed in cell 3-18 of the Segregation Unit due to disciplinary violations. (Dec. of Ashford, at ¶ 4.) In the morning, defendant D. Mills was informed by Correctional Officer Anthony (who is not named in this suit) that plaintiff Anderson had thrown sour milk on the officer. (Dec. of D. Mills, at ¶ 4.) Defendant D. Mills went to the cell to speak with plaintiff Anderson. (Id.) When she arrived at the cell, she saw "milk and fruit on the floor, both inside and outside the cell." (Id.) Additionally, the cell door was covered with sheets and blankets that prevented observation into the cell. It is against prison regulations to block visibility into the cell and to place foreign substances on the floor. (Id.)

According to defendant D. Mills, when she spoke to plaintiffs Anderson and Ruble, both refused to voluntarily leave the cell. (Id.) Defendant D. Mills then reported this to her superior officer, Lieutenant Thieke. (Dec. of D. Mills, at ¶ 6.) Additionally, she informed Lieutenant Thieke that Correctional Officer Anthony had seen a broken broom handle inside the cell. (Id.) Lieutenant Thieke went to the cell to speak with plaintiffs. (Id.)

At approximately 9:00 a.m., Lieutenant Thieke went to plaintiff's cell and observed a blanket covering the front of the cell. (Dec. of Thieke, at Ex. A.⁵) She also observed plaintiff Anderson holding a wooden stick that appeared to be about two feet in length with a semi-sharp end. (Id.) In her memorandum regarding the incident, Lieutenant Thieke states the following:

I asked inmate Anderson what is the problem he stated he was just real tired of staff not doing what they are supose sic to and it was too long of a story to get into, at this time inmate Ruble stated Lieutenant you sic going to have to do something about this were sic not going to do anything they request. Inmate Anderson was asked what started this, and he replied Lieutenant you always been straight up but today I don't want you involved you and Lieutenant Mills I respect but your sic going to have to get the SORT Team to come in and get us. At this time I ordered inmate Anderson to cuff up and come out to talk about the situation, he stated, No. Inmate Ruble was ordered to cuff up and he replied no Lieutenant you sic going to have to do what you got to do. At this time inmate Anderson stated, "Lieutenant were sic going to have to Rock & Roll".

(Id.)

Later that morning, defendant D. Mills observed that plaintiffs had thrown baby oil on the floor outside their cell and put more crushed fruit on the floor inside the door. (Dec. of D. Mills, at ¶ 7.) Additionally, defendant D. Mills observed that plaintiffs had tied a tee-shirt around the door to prevent it from opening. (Id.)

Defendant Ashford also went to plaintiffs' cell and observed that plaintiffs "had started a fire, used bed clothes to obstruct vision into the cell, tied their cell door shut to prevent anyone from opening it, thrown oil and other objects on the floor inside and outside their cell, and had a sharpened stick in the cell." (Dec. of Ashford, at ¶ 5.) Defendant Ashford told his superior officer about the situation. (Id.) Also, defendant Ashford concluded that plaintiffs were under the influence of alcohol. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Defendant Ashford also states that plaintiffs were ordered to "step to the door, to be handcuffed, and taken out of the cell, but they refused to do so." (Id. at ¶ 7.) At some point, a staff psychologist spoke with plaintiffs to try to resolve the situation. (Id. at ¶ 7.)

After her conversation with plaintiffs, Lieutenant Thieke spoke to the Captain who advised her to call defendant King and get a SORT⁶ team together for a "force cell move" to remove plaintiffs from their cell and move plaintiffs to the strong cells on the first floor. (Dec. of Thieke, at Ex. A.) A "force cell move" is a maneuver whereby a team of correctional officers enters an inmate's cell to take the inmate to a strong cell on another level. (Dec. of D. Mills, at ¶ 8.)

At approximately 11:15 a.m., a SORT team headed by defendant King entered the segregation floor. (Dec. of Thieke, at Ex. A.) Defendant King was the supervisor who directed the prison officers in bringing the inmates under control. (Aff. of King, at ¶ 8.) The SORT Team consisted of nine members: Officer Shealey, Officer M.A. Jones, Officer Burke, Officer R. Lee, Officer Estep, Officer Holsey, SORT member C. Mills, Officer Morton, and Counselor Paschall as Camera Officer. (Dec. of Thieke, at Ex. A.)

According to defendant Burke, at one point prior to entry, he asked plaintiffs to come out of the cells. Burke states that one of the plaintiffs said, "Bring it on, we will kill one of you." (Dec. of Burke, at ¶ 8.)

The SORT Team attempted to enter the cell, but had difficulty getting inside the cell since the door was tied shut. (Dec. of Ashford, at ¶ 9.) Defendant King cut the strips of cloth that were used to tie the door shut. (Dec. of Burke, at ¶ 6.) Feces had been smeared on the door. (Dec. of Ashford, at ¶ 9.) Additionally, urine, homemade alcohol and other liquids were on the floor. (Id.) Plaintiffs threw a liquid substance containing urine, feces, milk and alcohol onto the officers. (Dec. of Ashford, at ¶ 9; Dec. of Burke, at ¶ 6.) Plaintiffs also stuck defendant King and Ashford several times with the sharpened wooden stick. (Dec. of Ashford, at ¶ 9.)

Once the SORT team entered the cell, they were able to restrain plaintiffs after a physical struggle. (Dec. of C. Mills, at ¶ 5; Dec. of Jones, at ¶ 6; Dec. of Ashford, at ¶ 9.) Plaintiffs Anderson and Ruble both state that they were "quickly overwhelmed and were not noticeably injured during the `force cell.'" (Aff. of Anderson, at ¶ 3; Aff. of Ruble, at ¶ 3.) According to both plaintiffs, they were then dragged by their feet across the floor and down three flights of stairs to the strong cell. (Aff. of Anderson, at ¶ 4; Aff. of Ruble, at ¶ 4.) Both plaintiffs state that their heads came into violent contact with the stair treads and the floor while they were dragged to the strong cells. (Id.) Once plaintiffs reached the floor where the strong cells are located, both were lifted by their arms and dragged approximately 150 feet to the strong cell. (Aff. of Anderson, at ¶ 5; Aff. of Ruble, at ¶ 5.)

According to plaintiff Anderson, once he was placed in the strong cell, he was "beaten by a minimum of four officers who kicked me in the groin, back and head." (Aff. of Anderson, at ¶ 2.) He states that at the time he was beaten, he was "handcuffed, shackled, unarmed and posed no threat to any person, nor was he creating any disturbance or disorder within the facility." (Id. at ¶ 11.) Plaintiff Anderson states that defendants D. Mills, Burke, Jones, and C. Mills witnessed the beating and failed to intervene on his behalf. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Plaintiff Anderson also states that defendant King videotaped this beating and failed to intervene on his behalf. Plaintif...