United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division
DURWIN C. BOYD (AIS # 189145), Plaintiff,
CORIZON INC., Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
W. HAROLD ALBRITTON, Senior District Judge.
This case is before the court on a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Defendant, Corizon, Inc. (Doc. #41).
The Plaintiff, Durwin Boyd ("Boyd"), filed a Complaint bringing claims against Defendant Corizon, Inc. ("Corizon") and several individual defendants for violations of his constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(3), and 1986, and for various state law claims. The court ruled on a Motion to Dismiss brought by the individual defendants, and the case proceeded on the claims against Corizon only. The claims against Corizon are for violation of 14th Amendment substantive due process (Count I), violation of the 8th Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment (Count II), conspiracy (Count III), invidiously discriminatory animus (Count IV), and state law claims for wantonness (Count V) and negligence (Count VI).
The court has federal question subject matter jurisdiction over the federal claims and can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343(a), and 1367.
For reasons to be discussed, the Motion for Summary Judgment is due to be GRANTED as to the federal claims and the state law claims are due to be dismissed without prejudice.
II. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD
Summary judgment is proper "if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and... the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986).
The party asking for summary judgment "always bears the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis for its motion, @ relying on submissions Awhich it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact." Id. at 323. Once the moving party has met its burden, the nonmoving party must Ago beyond the pleadings@ and show that there is a genuine issue for trial. Id. at 324.
Both the party Aasserting that a fact cannot be, @ and a party asserting that a fact is genuinely disputed, must support their assertions by Aciting to particular parts of materials in the record, @ or by Ashowing that the materials cited do not establish the absence or presence of a genuine dispute, or that an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.@ Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 (c)(1)(A), (B). Acceptable materials under Rule 56(c)(1)(A) include Adepositions, documents, electronically stored information, affidavits or declarations, stipulations (including those made for purposes of the motion only), admissions, interrogatory answers, or other materials.@
To avoid summary judgment, the nonmoving party "must do more than show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts." Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586 (1986). On the other hand, the evidence of the nonmovant must be believed and all justifiable inferences must be drawn in its favor. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986).
After the nonmoving party has responded to the motion for summary judgment, the court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a).
Boyd was an inmate at the Elmore Correctional Facility in Elmore, Alabama. Corizon is the contract health care service provider for the Alabama Department of Corrections ("ADOC"). Corizon employs doctors and nurses at both the ...