United States District Court, District of Maryland
RAYMOND D. HURT Plaintiff
FANN, et al. Defendants
DEBORAH K. CHASANOW, United States District Judge
Pending is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment. ECF No. 20. Plaintiff opposes the motion with a Cross Motion for Summary Judgment. ECF No. 22. A hearing in this matter is unnecessary. See Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md. 2014). Defendants’ motion, construed as a Motion for Summary Judgment, shall be granted for the reasons stated below.
Plaintiff, an inmate incarcerated at North Branch Correctional Institution (“NBCI”), claims that when he was moved to housing unit C-1 on February 25, 2013, a campaign of harassment was launched against him by the officers who are regularly assigned there. Specifically, he claims that from March 1, 2013 through April 24, 2013, officers have denied him the ability to attend medical sick calls, dental appointments, and disciplinary hearings by erroneously claiming that he refused to attend. ECF No. 1 at p. 2.
Plaintiff alleges that during the time-frame referenced he was suffering objectively serious medical needs inasmuch as he was over 30 pounds underweight and severely emaciated. He states that Defendants Fann, Grub, Passman, Rounds, Sr., and Conrad were aware of his medical needs, yet they denied him the opportunity to see medical staff for care. Plaintiff also claims that Warden Shearin and Lt. Wilt were also aware of his medical needs as they “opted to disregard . . . [an administrative remedy request or ARP] ARP-NBCI-0918-13 without any form of investigation whatsoever.” Id. at p. 3. Rather, Plaintiff claims the only response provided was that the officer denied the allegation that he was improperly denied the opportunity to see medical staff. Id.
Plaintiff also alleges that officers have engaged in interception of his legal mail, denying him the opportunity to appeal the dismissal of ARP-NBCI-0918-13 to the Commissioner of Correction. He alleges that on May 12, 2013, Officer Rounds Jr. was observed at 10:00 p.m. removing Plaintiff’s outgoing mail from his cell door and “subsequently pilfering it.” ECF No. 1 at p. 3.
Plaintiff claims that on October 2, 2013, he received a dismissal of his appeal to the Inmate Grievance Office (“IGO”) for failure properly to exhaust the ARP through appeal to the Commissioner. Id.; see also ECF No. 1-1 at pp. 2 – 3. Plaintiff prepared a petition to appeal the IGO’s dismissal to the Circuit Court for Allegany County which he placed in his cell door for mail pick-up. He claims that at 10:00 p.m. he observed Officer Preston remove the legal mail from his doorway and “pilfering it.” ECF No. 1 at p. 3.
On October 8, 2013, Plaintiff states that he handed Sgt. Ferris an amended petition for delivery to the Circuit Court for Allegany County regarding the appeal of the IGO’s dismissal of ARP-NBCI-0918-13, along with other legal mail. Plaintiff claims that Ferris did not deliver the mail to the mailbox and that Ferris can be observed pilfering his legal mail on the video monitors for the tier. Id.
Plaintiff filed an ARP regarding Ferris’s conduct, ARP-NBCI-4115-13. He claims that instead of investigating the allegation, Shearin simply relied on Ferris’ denial of the conduct. Plaintiff states that he hand-delivered an appeal of Shearin’s denial to the housing unit mailbox on January 14, 2014, and asserts that if it did not reach its intended destination, then the mail room staff is also guilty of interfering with the delivery of his legal mail. ECF No. 1 at p. 3.
Plaintiff asserts that the Warden’s response to ARP-NBCI-4305-13 stating that he refused medical treatment on December 18, 19, and 20, 2013, is fraudulent. He asserts that he was never approached by an officer on these dates for purposes of securing a “refusal” to attend the sick call. Id. at p. 4; see also ECF No. 1-1 at p. 5. Plaintiff further states that the claim that he refused sick calls on January 9, and 25, 2014, is also incorrect and that he was never approached by a correctional officer to obtain a refusal. In addition, Plaintiff claims that he turned in another sick call slip on January 30, 2014, and was never called to attend sick call. ECF No. 1 at p. 4. He asserts that this denial of medical care is “especially egregious for the reason that medical personnel are still contending that Plaintiff still weighs 140 pounds.” Id. Plaintiff does not state why this belief by medical personnel is harmful or incorrect.
Standard of Review
Summary Judgment is governed by Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a) which provides that:
The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is ...