Michael Ray Scott v. Gene Ward, Seward County Sheriff, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Kansas granted defendants’ motions to dismiss Michael Ray Scott’s claims concerning allegedly inadequate medical care, discriminatory treatment, municipal liability, and negligence arising from his incarceration at the Seward County Jail. The court held that the complaint did not plausibly allege deliberate indifference, personal participation by Sheriff Gene Ward, a municipal policy or failure to train, or discriminatory treatment. The court dismissed the state-law negligence claims and denied as moot a motion to strike and denied Scott’s motion to supplement the complaint.

Holdings

1. Scott failed to plausibly plead the subjective component of deliberate indifference because his allegations did not show that Davis knowingly disregarded a substantial risk of serious harm, as opposed to providing negligent or allegedly inadequate care.
2. Scott failed to state a § 1983 deliberate-indifference claim against Ward because he did not allege Ward's personal participation in denying medical care.
3. Because Scott was a pretrial detainee, his deliberate-indifference claims arise under the Fourteenth Amendment, although the applicable deliberate-indifference standard is the same as the Eighth Amendment standard.
4. Scott failed to state municipal-liability or official-capacity claims because he alleged no nonconclusory facts showing that Seward County or Sheriff Ward adopted or promulgated a policy that caused the alleged constitutional violation.
5. Scott failed to state a claim for discriminatory treatment under the Fourteenth Amendment because the complaint did not provide factual support for the allegation that he was discriminated against because he had an infectious disease.
6. The negligence claims against Seward County and Ward in his official capacity were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because Scott did not show compliance with the Kansas Tort Claims Act's pre-suit notice requirement.
7. The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law negligence claims after dismissing all federal claims.
8. Scott's motion to supplement his complaint was denied because the proposed supplementation would be futile and concerned events with unclear relevance to the existing allegations, after Scott had been transferred to another correctional facility.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Scott plausibly alleged deliberate indifference to serious medical needs against Nurse Davis and Sheriff Ward in their individual capacities.
2. Whether Scott plausibly alleged municipal liability against Seward County and official-capacity liability against Sheriff Ward under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
3. Whether Scott stated a cognizable Fourteenth Amendment discriminatory-treatment claim based on his infectious disease.
4. Whether the Kansas Tort Claims Act notice requirement barred the negligence claims against Seward County and Sheriff Ward in his official capacity.
5. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the negligence claims against Davis and Ward in his individual capacity after dismissing the federal claims.
6. Whether Scott should be permitted to supplement his complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(d).

Disposition

dismissed