Walls v. Tadman, et al., No. 13-2262 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed suit against prison officials after he was attacked three times by fellow inmates over the course of about a year and a half. Plaintiff claimed that the officials violated his Eighth Amendment right against the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment when they failed to protect him from those attacks. The court concluded that officials offered plaintiff protective custody, which he declined; when officials placed him in protective custody anyway, plaintiff asked to be returned to the general population; and plaintiff repeatedly denied the existence of any potential problems. Plaintiff failed to even show negligence, much less deliberate indifference on the part of the officials. Therefore, plaintiff has not demonstrated that prison officials responded unreasonably and, therefore, that the officials violated his Eighth Amendment rights. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Court Description: Civil Case - civil rights. In claim that prison officials failed to protect him from three attacks by other prisoners, the district court did not err in granting defendants summary judgment. Record shows that prison officials offered Walls protective custody and asked him if he wanted to report enemy situation, to which Walls declined. He denied existence of potential problems. Record does not show negligence, much less deliberate indifference.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.