John Valda Rice v. Melissa Andrewjeski, et al.

Rice · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington · February 23, 2026 · No. 2:23-CV-00087-SAB

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment in John Valda Rice’s prisoner civil-rights action alleging Eighth Amendment violations involving medical care and access to ice. The court held that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity and that the record did not support a finding of deliberate indifference or deprivation of the minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities. The court also denied Plaintiff’s motions to effectuate service and suppress evidence, entered judgment for Defendants, and directed that the case be closed.

Holdings

  1. Defendants were entitled to summary judgment because Rice failed to show that the challenged conduct deprived him of the minimal civilized measure of life's necessities or that defendants acted with deliberate indifference. At most, the evidence could establish negligence, which does not constitute an Eighth Amendment violation.
  2. Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because the alleged isolated denials of ice, and the alleged failures to provide additional testing, an additional mattress, a particular brace, or particular treatment, were not conduct that existing precedent clearly established as violating the Eighth Amendment.
  3. Rice's motion to effectuate service was denied as moot after the court entered judgment for defendants.
  4. The motion to suppress evidence was denied because Rice did not show a compelling reason to seal the records.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment on Rice's Eighth Amendment medical-care claim.
  2. Whether defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because the alleged conduct did not violate a constitutional right and, in any event, the asserted rights were not clearly established.
  3. Whether Rice's motion to effectuate service should be denied as moot after judgment was entered.
  4. Whether Rice's motion to suppress evidence should be denied for failure to show a compelling reason to seal the records.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (22)

  • Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 250, 255 (1986)(applied)
  • Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 325 (1986)(applied)
  • Smith v. Univ. of Wash. Law Sch., 233 F.3d 1188, 1193 (9th Cir. 2000)(applied)
  • Hansen v. United States, 7 F.3d 137, 138 (9th Cir. 1993)(applied)
  • Las Vegas Sands, LLC v. Neheme, 632 F.3d 526, 532-33 (9th Cir. 2011)(applied)
  • Soremekun v. Thrifty Payless, Inc., 509 F.3d 978, 984 (9th Cir. 2007)(applied)
  • Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 923 (9th Cir. 2004)(applied)
  • Devereaux v. Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070, 1074 (9th Cir. 2001)(applied)
  • Tsao v. Desert Palace, Inc., 698 F.3d 1128, 1138 (9th Cir. 2012)(applied)
  • McGuckin v. Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1059 (9th Cir. 1992)(applied)

Showing top 10 of 22.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…