Augustine v. Shirley

Summary

The document contains an order directing random assignment of a district judge and findings and recommendations on defendants’ motion for summary judgment in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Plaintiff alleged that Wasco State Prison officials were deliberately indifferent to risks from contaminated drinking water. The magistrate judge recommended granting summary judgment to defendants and entering judgment in their favor, subject to the parties’ opportunity to file objections.

Holdings

1. The evidence did not establish that the TCP concentrations in Wasco State Prison's water created an objectively sufficiently serious risk of harm or that Augustine's medical conditions were caused by the exposure; exceeding a state environmental or drinking-water standard alone did not establish a constitutional violation.
2. The undisputed evidence did not show that Shirley, Cronjager, or DeGough knew of and disregarded an excessive risk of serious harm to inmates.
3. Defendants were entitled to summary judgment on Augustine's deliberate-indifference claim.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the undisputed evidence established an objectively substantial risk of serious harm from Augustine's exposure to TCP in Wasco State Prison's drinking water.
2. Whether the undisputed evidence established that defendants knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to Augustine's health or safety.
3. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment on Augustine's Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim.

Disposition

other