White v. Totty et al (INMATE 1), No. 2:2017cv00824 - Document 20 (M.D. Ala. 2021)
Court Description: OPINION. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 1/25/2021. (djy, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
White v. Totty et al (INMATE 1) Doc. 20 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION COURTNEY WHITE, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. LT. TOTTY and OFFICER D. LEWIS, Defendants. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:17cv824-MHT (WO) OPINION Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff, a state inmate, filed this lawsuit claiming that the defendant correctional rights by officers using violated excessive his force Eighth against Amendment him. This lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that defendants' motion for summary judgment should be granted as to plaintiff’s claims for damages against defendants in their official capacities, and denied as to plaintiff’s claims for individual damages against capacities and the for defendants injunctive in their relief in Dockets.Justia.com their individual and official capacities. the court are defendants’ recommendation. review of defendants’ After the an record, objections objections to the de novo concludes that independent the should Also before court be and overruled and the magistrate judge’s recommendation adopted. Most of defendants’ specific objections amount to an argument that their evidence is more persuasive than plaintiff’s. court must summary However, that is not the question the answer judgment on stage summary the judgment. judge's “[A]t function is the not himself to weigh the evidence and determine the truth of the matter but to determine genuine issue for trial.” Inc., 477 U.S. 242, whether there is a Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 249 (1986). “‘As a general principle, a plaintiff's testimony cannot be discounted on summary judgment unless it is blatantly contradicted by the record, blatantly inconsistent, or incredible as a matter of law, meaning that it relates to facts that 2 could not have possibly been observed or events that are contrary to the laws of nature.’” Sears v. Roberts, 922 F.3d 1199, 1208 (11th Cir. 2019) (quoting Feliciano v. City of Miami Beach, 707 F.3d 1244, 1253 (11th Cir. 2013)). While plaintiff’s evidence suffers from weaknesses that can be brought out at trial, those weakness do not rise to the level of “blatantly contradicted by the record, blatantly inconsistent, or incredible as a matter of law.” Id. Moreover, contrary to defendants’ argument, their evidence does not conclusively establish that plaintiff was on drugs at the time of the incident and was not having a seizure as he claimed, or that they did not use excessive force against him. results behavior are was circumstantial a result of While the drug test evidence drug that use plaintiff’s rather than a seizure, the test results are not conclusive proof that he was intoxicated on drugs at the moment of the alleged beating: positive drug tests typically indicate 3 use within a certain period of days or weeks, not at a particular moment. plaintiff’s In contention addition, that evidence during the supports events in question, he was prescribed medication for a seizure condition and was not taking it properly. See Certified Redacted Prison Records (doc. no. 7-3) at 10 (“Nurse Miller advised Lt. Totty that inmate White is prescribed seizure medication and hasn't been taking it properly.”). using drugs And, of course, even if plaintiff was at the relevant time, that would not preclude the possibility that defendants used excessive force against him.* As to the contention that plaintiff’s injuries were superficial, against a “the prisoner use may of excessive constitute physical cruel and force unusual * Moreover, there is circumstantial evidence in the record that could be viewed as undermining defendants’ representations about their actions. For example, they claimed never to have struck plaintiff in the face, but photographic evidence appears to show that after the encounter with defendants, he had a bright red contusion on the bridge of his nose. See Certified Redacted Prison Records (doc. no. 7-3) at 12. 4 punishment [even] serious injury.” (1992). “An when the inmate does not suffer Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 4 inmate who is gratuitously beaten by guards does not lose his ability to pursue an excessive force claim merely because he has the good fortune to escape without serious injury.” Wilkins v. Gaddy, 559 U.S. 34, 38 (2010). An appropriate judgment will be entered. DONE, this the 25th day of January, 2021. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 5
]]>
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.
