Semons v. Utter

United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin · May 2, 2025 · No. 2:23-cv-01497

Summary

This is a decision and order from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin granting the defendants' motion for summary judgment in a prisoner civil rights lawsuit brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The pro se plaintiff alleged that prison health officials and a visiting dentist violated his Eighth Amendment rights by failing to provide adequate dental care and denying him specific dental supplies. The court found no genuine dispute of material fact and concluded that the defendants did not act with deliberate indifference or bear responsibility for staffing shortages, leading to dismissal of the case.

Court
United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin
Writing for the Court
William E.
Jurisdiction
United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin
Decision date
May 2, 2025
Docket number
2:23-cv-01497
Procedural posture
Defendants moved for summary judgment; court granted the motion and dismissed the case.
Standard of review
Summary judgment standard under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

civil rightssection 1983

Practice areas

civil rightsconstitutional lawcivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Gugler and Utter can be held liable under §1983 for alleged Eighth Amendment violations related to dental staffing shortages.
  2. Whether Utter's denial of dental floss and toothpaste constitutes deliberate indifference under the Eighth Amendment.
  3. Whether Dr. Turon was deliberately indifferent to Semons's dental needs.

Holdings

  1. Summary judgment is granted in favor of Gugler and Utter; they are not liable under §1983 because they had no responsibility for dental staffing and no constitutional violation is shown.
  2. Summary judgment is granted in Utter's favor; the denial was made by the Special Needs Committee and, even if Utter were responsible, the plaintiff failed to show a constitutional violation.
  3. Summary judgment is granted in Dr. Turon's favor; his response was within the range of professional judgment and does not constitute deliberate indifference.

Key quotations

The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. (summary judgment standard)

Factual background

Floyd L. Semons, an incarcerated prisoner, alleged that Health Services Unit managers Hannah Utter and Bonnie Gugler, as well as dentist Dr. Tobias Turon, failed to provide timely dental care. Gugler and Utter had no authority to hire dentists or schedule appointments, and Dr. Turon placed Semons on a routine waitlist after a single dental services request.

Procedural history

Plaintiff filed a §1983 action alleging Eighth Amendment violations relating to dental care; defendants filed a motion for summary judgment; the district court evaluated the motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and granted summary judgment, dismissing the action.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…