Opinion

Brown v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.

  • 2010 Ohio 3751
Court
Ohio Court of Claims
Filed
Jul 27, 2010
Status
Published
On the bench
Weaver
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 32.2%

The opinion

[Cite as Brown v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2010-Ohio-3751.]

Court of Claims of Ohio

The Ohio Judicial Center

65 South Front Street, Third Floor

Columbus, OH 43215

614.387.9800 or 1.800.824.8263

www.cco.state.oh.us

HORACE BROWN, III

Plaintiff

v.

DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION

Defendant

Case No. 2009-05226

Judge Clark B. Weaver Sr.

Magistrate Matthew C. Rambo

ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

{¶ 1} On May 19, 2010, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment

pursuant to Civ.R. 56(B). On June 2, 2010, plaintiff filed a response. The motion is now

before the court on a non-oral hearing pursuant to L.C.C.R. 4(D).

{¶ 2} Civ.R. 56(C) states, in part, as follows:

{¶ 3} “Summary judgment shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings,

depositions, answers to interrogatories, written admissions, affidavits, transcripts of

evidence, and written stipulations of fact, if any, timely filed in the action, show that

there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to

judgment as a matter of law. No evidence or stipulation may be considered except as

stated in this rule. A summary judgment shall not be rendered unless it appears from

the evidence or stipulation, and only from the evidence or stipulation, that reasonable

minds can come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to the party

against whom the motion for summary judgment is made, that party being entitled to

have the evidence or stipulation construed most strongly in the party’s favor.” See also

Case No. 2009-05226 -2- ENTRY

Gilbert v. Summit County, 104 Ohio St.3d 660, 2004-Ohio-7108, citing Temple v. Wean

United, Inc. (1977), 50 Ohio St.2d 317.

{¶ 4} At all times relevant, plaintiff was an inmate in the custody and control of

defendant at the Ross Correctional Institution (RCI) pursuant to R.C. 5120.16. Plaintiff

alleges that on April 4, 2009, he fell from his upper bunk, hit his head on the sink, and

that he suffered numerous lacerations and a broken vertebra as a result. Plaintiff

further alleges that after the fall he was compelled by employees of defendant to walk

from his cell to a cart and that he was then forced to sit upright in the cart on the way to

the infirmary. According to his complaint, when plaintiff arrived in the infirmary he was

made to change his clothing, placed in arm and leg shackles, and then made to walk to

a van for transport to a hospital. Plaintiff asserts that due to the nature of his injuries, a

stretcher should have been used to move him from his cell to the cart and from the cart

to the transport van.

{¶ 5} In order for plaintiff to prevail upon his claim of negligence, he must prove

by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant owed him a duty, that defendant’s

acts or omissions resulted in a breach of that duty, and that the breach proximately

caused his injuries. Armstrong v. Best Buy Co., Inc., 99 Ohio St.3d 79, 81, 2003-Ohio-

2573, citing Menifee v. Ohio Welding Products, Inc. (1984), 15 Ohio St.3d 75, 77.

{¶ 6} In support of its motion for summary judgment, defendant filed the affidavit

of Richard Krauser, who states:

{¶ 7} “1. I have personal knowledge of and I am competent to testify to the

facts contained in this Affidavit.

{¶ 8} “2. I am employed by [defendant] as a Nurse I at [RCI] in Chillicothe,

Ohio. I have been a Nurse I for approximately twelve years. I have been a Registered

Nurse in the state of Ohio since October 23, 1995.

{¶ 9} “3. Through my employment at [defendant], I have personal knowledge

of [defendant’s] policies and procedures regarding inmate medical treatment and care.

Case No. 2009-05226 -3- ENTRY

{¶ 10} “4. As a policy and procedure at [defendant], when an inmate allegedly

falls from his/her bed, medical staff is summoned to begin administering medical care.

The responding registered nurse and/or certified medical professional assesses the

condition of the inmate. As part of providing treatment to the inmate, the responding

medical professional determines how the inmate should be moved and/or transported

from his/her cell if necessary or indicated.

{¶ 11} “5. * * *

{¶ 12} “6. On April 4, 2009, I was working in the infirmary and received

notification that [plaintiff] allegedly fell out of his bed and cut his head.

{¶ 13} “7. Pursuant to [defendant’s] policy and procedure, I, as the registered

nurse assigned to respond to medical emergencies, reported to [plaintiff’s] cell in Unit

2A to assess his condition. As a part of my treatment and care of [plaintiff], I decided

how to appropriately move him from his cell to the infirmary and ultimately to the

transport van for further medical evaluation, treatment and care.

{¶ 14} “8. Based on my training, education and experience, it is my opinion, to

a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that the medical decisions regarding

[plaintiff’s] care, transport and treatment met the generally accepted standards of

medical care.”

{¶ 15} A party moving for summary judgment bears the initial burden to inform

the trial court of the basis for its motion, and to point to portions of the record that show

that there are no genuine issues of material fact on the non-moving party’s claim.

Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280, 1996-Ohio-107. Once the moving party has met its

initial burden, the non-moving party must produce competent evidence establishing the

existence of a genuine issue for trial. Id.

{¶ 16} In opposition to the motion, plaintiff provided his own affidavit. However,

the bulk of plaintiff’s averments concern his allegedly erroneous assignment to an upper

bunk, a claim for which was dismissed by the court on September 1, 2009. Regarding

his movement from his cell to the infirmary, and ultimately to a transport van, he states

Case No. 2009-05226 -4- ENTRY

merely that he “had a severe visible injury to his forehead and a visible cut under his

eye and was in pain which was aggravated when correctional officers forced him to walk

from his cell to the cart, change his clothes and walk to the van.” Plaintiff’s own affidavit

testimony is not competent to rebut that of defendant’s nurse who stated that defendant

acted according to the accepted standard of care at all times when transporting plaintiff

from his cell to the transport van.

{¶ 17} Based upon the foregoing, the court finds that there are no genuine issues

of material fact and that defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Accordingly, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and judgment is

rendered in favor of defendant. Court costs are assessed against plaintiff. The clerk

shall serve upon all parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal.

_____________________________________

CLARK B. WEAVER SR.

Judge

cc:

Emily M. Simmons Richard F. Swope

Assistant Attorney General 6480 East Main Street, Suite 102

150 East Gay Street, 18th Floor Reynoldsburg, Ohio 43068

Columbus, Ohio 43215-3130

MR/cmd

Filed July 27, 2010

To S.C. reporter August 11, 2010

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.