Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Plemons. v. Core Civic Administrative Headquarters

United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division

June 7, 2019

DAVID HOPKINS PLEMONS, Plaintiff,
v.
CORE CIVIC ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS, et al., Defendants.

          Crenshaw Judge

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          JEFFERY S. FRENSLEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         I. Introduction and Background

         This matter is before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Docket No. 47.[1]

         Defendants Greer and Washburn have filed a Response in opposition to Plaintiff's Motion, arguing that Plaintiff's Motion fails to comply with the Federal and Local Rules and that the actual evidence before the Court establishes that Defendants did not violate Plaintiff's First or Eighth Amendment rights. Docket No. 50. In support of their Response, Defendants Greer and Washburn have submitted their Declarations. Docket Nos. 51, 52. Defendants Greer and Washburn also incorporate by reference the Response they submitted to Plaintiff's previously-filed Motion. Docket No. 31.

         Defendant Brun has filed a separate Response in opposition to Plaintiff's Motion, arguing that Plaintiff's Motion fails to comply with the Federal and Local Rules. Docket No. 53. Specifically, Defendant Brun argues that Plaintiff's Motion is deficient because: (1) it contains “a stream of consciousness statement of law and facts”; (2) such “facts” “are scattered throughout the motion”; (3) the Motion “fails to cite to any evidence in the record in support of any stated fact”; and (4) Plaintiff has failed to file a Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, in derogation of LR 56.01. Id.

         For the reasons set forth below, the undersigned finds that Plaintiff has failed to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 and Local Rule 56.01 such that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment should be DENIED.

         II. Facts

         A. Declaration of Tara Greer

         Defendant Greer is an employee of CoreCivic of Tennessee, LLC (“CoreCivic”) who works as a Case Manager at the Trousdale Turner Correctional Center. Docket No. 51, Declaration of Tara Greer (“Greer Dec.”), ¶ 1. Defendant Greer does not recall Plaintiff's protective custody hearing and she does not recall an inmate requesting medical treatment during a protective custody hearing. Id., ¶ 3. If an inmate did request medical treatment during a protective custody hearing, particularly for something like broken ribs and difficulty breathing, Defendant Greer would help the inmate to secure necessary medical treatment and would not ignore the inmate's medical needs. Id.

         B. Declaration of Russell Washburn

         Defendant Washburn is an employee of CoreCivic who works as the Warden at Trousdale Turner Correctional Center. Docket No. 52, Declaration of Russell Washburn (“Washburn Dec.”), ¶ 1. Defendant Washburn did not refuse to separate Plaintiff and another inmate who was harassing Plaintiff in retaliation for Plaintiff's allegedly reporting gang operations and seeking protection from allegedly unsafe living conditions. Id., ¶ 3.

         III. Law and Analysis

         A. Motion for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.