Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jeffcoat v. Carpenter

United States District Court, D. South Carolina

January 27, 2017

Lisco D. Jeffcoat, Plaintiff,
Capt. Carpenter, Lt, Hamby, Sgt. Luten, Sgt. Edens, Dr. James Dorn, and Nurse White, Defendants.


          Richard Mark Gergel United States District Court Judge

         This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R & R) of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 59), recommending that the motions for summary judgment filed by Defendants be granted (Dkt. Nos. 41, 46). For the reasons stated below, the Court adopts the R & R as the order of the Court, grants Defendants' motions to dismiss.

         I. Background

         Plaintiff is a diabetic inmate who is currently housed at at the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center. Plaintiff filed this this pro se action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendants violated his rights due to medical indifference based on events that occurred while he was incarcerated at Anderson City Jail, (See Dkt. No. 17-3 at 2 ("Not receiving proper medical attention and medication being handled improperly")).

         Plaintiff asserts that that on June 8, 2015, a bottle of insulin that was specifically ordered for him a week before could not be located. (Dkt. No. 17-3 at 3). Plaintiff asserts that an officer found a months-old bottle of insulin that Plaintiff had previously used and provided that to Plaintiff instead of the recently ordered bottle of insulin. When Plaintiff took the allegedly old insulin, he began to feel dizzy and nauseated. (Id.)

         On June 9, 2015, an officer informed Plaintiff that the recently ordered bottle of insulin had been found "in the BIOHAZARD bucket [("sharps container")] that is [used for] needles and trash." Plaintiff alleges that he was given this bottle and told to take his insulin. Plaintiff complied, and when he checked his blood sugar level, it was 351. When he checked again at 8:30 p.m. that night, his blood sugar level had risen to 451. (Id.).

         Plaintiff was transferred to a holding cell to wait for a nurse, and when he was informed that a nurse was not coming, Plaintiff alleges that he asked to speak to Defendant Luten. After informing Defendant Luten that he felt dizzy, sick, and nauseated, Plaintiff alleges that she responded by sarcastically telling him to have a good night. Plaintiff also claims that he requested to be taken to the hospital multiple times on June 9, 2015. (Id.).

         On June 10, 2015 at 5:30 a.m., Plaintiffs blood sugar was 198. Around 10:00 a.m., Plaintiff went to the nurse's office and his blood sugar readings were 454 and 471. When he asked again if he could be taken to the hospital, he was informed that his condition had to be worse. (Id. at 4).

         Around 2:00 p.m., Plaintiff was taken to the hospital. His blood sugar level was 434, and he received fluids for dehydration and insulin for his high blood sugar levels.

         Plaintiff alleges that while he was in the hospital, that the doctor told him that the insulin the jail provided him was "not strong enough" and that Plaintiff should be receiving the type of insulin he took prior to being incarcerated. Plaintiff alleges that when he informed the jail doctor about the hospital doctor's recommendations, he was told that the other types of insulins "were expensive and [the jail] did not want to get stuck with the medicines if [Plaintiff] were to leave the city jail." (Id.).

         Plaintiff asserts that his blood sugar "still runs high to this day" and that he has not been able to speak with Defendants Carpenter, Edens, or Hamby about the incident, despite multiple requests. (Id.).

         Defendants filed motions for summary judgment (Dkt. Nos. 41 and 46), which included affidavits by Defendants White and Dorn, medical professionals at the jail. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to the two motions for summary judgment on June 22, 2016 (Dkt. No. 56), and on August 22, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued an R & R recommending that the Court grant both motions for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 59). Plaintiff filed objections to the R & R on September 1, 2016. (Dkt. No. 61).

         II. Legal Standard

         The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the R & R or specified proposed findings or recommendation to which objection is made. Diamond ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.