Nicholas Cory Plug v. County of Van Buren, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan reviewed objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action concerning medical care provided to a pretrial detainee. The court adopted the recommendation granting summary judgment to the county, sheriff, and deputy, but rejected the recommendation as to the nurse and granted summary judgment to her as well. The court concluded that the evidence did not establish deliberate indifference or violation of a clearly established constitutional right, and it dismissed the case.

Holdings

1. When a party properly objects to portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the district court must determine those portions de novo and may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition.
2. Deputy Kelly, Sheriff Abott, and Van Buren County were entitled to summary judgment.
3. The summary judgment record did not permit a reasonable factfinder to conclude that Nurse Hickmott acted recklessly in the face of an unjustifiably high risk of harm to Plug's serious medical needs.
4. Nurse Hickmott was entitled to qualified immunity because the evidence did not establish a violation of a clearly established constitutional right under the circumstances presented.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court should adopt the magistrate judge's recommendations after conducting de novo review of the parties' objections.
2. Whether Deputy Dillon Kelly was entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity.
3. Whether Sheriff Daniel Abott was entitled to summary judgment on the official-capacity failure-to-train claim because Plug failed to show a pattern of constitutional violations.
4. Whether Van Buren County was entitled to summary judgment because Plug failed to identify a county policy or custom that caused the alleged constitutional violation.
5. Whether the summary judgment record permitted a reasonable factfinder to conclude that Nurse Roslynn Hickmott acted recklessly in the face of an unjustifiably high risk of harm in violation of a pretrial detainee's Fourteenth Amendment right to adequate medical care.
6. Whether Nurse Hickmott was entitled to qualified immunity because the alleged conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional right.

Disposition

dismissed