Opinion
Civil Action No. 7:10-cv-81 (HL)
07-13-2012
ADAM WADE CRUTCHLEY, Plaintiff, v. Sheriff ANTHONY HEATH, Officer DAMON BENNETT, Cpt. ANTONIO CARTER, and Sgt. ESTON CONNELL, Defendants.
ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, filed June 15, 2012, as well as the objection of Plaintiff Adam Wade Crutchley, filed June 29, 2012. The Court finds that Plaintiff's objection is without merit and adopts the Recommendation of the Magistrate.
Plaintiff objects to the Magistrate's Recommendation to grant Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing that his claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs should survive past summary judgment. Plaintiff contends that Defendants were aware that he was diabetic and did not provide proper treatment and care.
In his Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Thomas Q. Langstaff states that Plaintiff is unable to establish that Defendants knew of his medical condition, an element of the prima facie case for deliberate indifference. In his objection, Plaintiff gives two reasons explaining why he thinks Defendants were aware of his condition. First, Plaintiff claims that he mentioned his condition during his arrest and booking. Second, Plaintiff states that he received meals specially tailored for diabetics. The Court finds both of these allegations insufficient to demonstrate Defendants' subjective knowledge of Plaintiff's medical condition. While Plaintiff may have mentioned his condition during booking, and while he may receive diabetic meals, these facts do not prove that Defendants were aware of the fact that he was diabetic. There is no evidence that Defendants were present during his booking or that Defendants know what meals Plaintiff is served.
In sum, there is no support for Plaintiff's allegations that Defendants knew about his condition. The Recommendation of the Magistrate is hereby approved, adopted, and made Order of the Court.
________________________
HUGH LAWSON, SENIOR JUDGE
ebr