Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Washington v. Duval, 1st Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views8 pages
    This document is a summary of a court case involving Jerome Washington appealing a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants on his claim that they were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs and safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The appeals court affirms the district court's decision, finding that while one defendant was aware Washington had placed a noose around his neck because his cell was cold, the defendant's decision not to provide a blanket was reasonable given concerns about Washington's safety if returned to the general population and that the defendant continued to observe Washington that night.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-09-26 Precedential Status: Precedential Docket: 95-2312

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a summary of a court case involving Jerome Washington appealing a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants on his claim that they were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs and safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The appeals court affirms the district court's decision, finding that while one defendant was aware Washington had placed a noose around his neck because his cell was cold, the defendant's decision not to provide a blanket was reasonable given concerns about Washington's safety if returned to the general population and that the defendant continued to observe Washington that night.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    14 views8 pages

    Washington v. Duval, 1st Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a summary of a court case involving Jerome Washington appealing a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants on his claim that they were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs and safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The appeals court affirms the district court's decision, finding that while one defendant was aware Washington had placed a noose around his neck because his cell was cold, the defendant's decision not to provide a blanket was reasonable given concerns about Washington's safety if returned to the general population and that the defendant continued to observe Washington that night.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 8

    USCA1 Opinion

    September 26, 1996

    [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]


    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
    ____________________

    No. 95-2312

    JEROME WASHINGTON,

    Plaintiff, Appellant,

    v.

    RONALD DUVAL, SUPERINTENDENT,

    MCI-WALPOLE, ET AL.,

    Defendants, Appellees.

    ____________________

    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

    [Hon. Joseph L. Tauro, U.S. District Judge]


    ___________________

    ____________________

    Before

    Selya, Cyr and Boudin,


    Circuit Judges.
    ______________

    ____________________

    Jerome Washington on brief pro se.


    _________________
    Vincent L. DiCianni
    ___________________

    and Ferriter, Scobbo, Sikora, Singal, Car


    ______________________________________

    & Rodophele, P.C., on brief for appellees.


    _________________

    ____________________

    ____________________

    Per Curiam.
    ___________

    Jerome

    Washington appeals

    from the

    district court's

    favor

    on

    his

    claim

    indifferent to

    the

    grant

    that

    judgment in

    defendants

    the

    to the

    reasons

    the

    deliberately

    in violation of

    Constitution.

    given in

    defendants'

    were

    his medical needs and safety

    Eighth Amendment

    substantially

    of summary

    We affirm

    district

    for

    court's

    decision dated May 8, 1995, adding only a brief comment.

    Washington

    correctly

    claims

    defendants'

    affidavit in support

    to

    facts

    recite

    which

    on

    appeal

    that

    of summary judgment failed

    suggested

    that

    defendant

    John

    McClintock had reason to suspect that Washington might injure

    himself

    if left

    supports the

    deliberately

    in a

    cold cell.

    Nonetheless,

    the record

    court's determination that defendants

    indifferent

    to

    providing him with a blanket.

    Washington's

    needs

    were not

    by

    not

    Washington had told McClintock

    that he

    had placed

    bedding,

    because his

    a noose around

    cell

    his neck, made

    was cold.

    At the

    from his

    same

    time,

    however, he had also told McClintock that he did not want

    to

    return to the general prison population because he feared for

    his

    safety.

    McClintock's

    concerned that

    fear about

    the

    indicate

    Washington might hurt himself

    being returned to the general

    circumstances,

    Washington a

    notes

    McClintock's

    blanket was reasonable,

    that

    he

    because of his

    population.

    decision

    even if

    was

    not

    Under

    to

    give

    he knew

    that

    Washington had once placed a noose around his neck because he

    -2-

    was cold, especially

    since he continued regular

    of Washington and informed

    the next day if

    him that he could have

    observation

    a blanket

    the night passed "without incident."

    the circumstances,

    McClintock

    did

    indifference to Washington's needs,

    defendants' favor was proper.

    Affirmed.
    _________

    not

    act

    in

    Under

    deliberate

    and summary judgment

    in

    -3-

    You might also like