United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(ECF NO. 22)
JAMES
R. SWEENEY II, JUDGE
Plaintiff
Jordan Ellis brings claims against Defendants Hancock
Sheriff's Department, Hancock County Council, and Hancock
County Board of Commissioners for negligence and violations
of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) Specifically,
Ellis alleges that, while an inmate at Hancock County Jail,
Defendants' negligence and chronic understaffing caused
him to be assaulted by a fellow inmate. Defendants now move
for summary judgment. (ECF No. 22.) For the following
reasons, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is
granted in part and denied in
part.
I.
Background
In
2013, the Indiana Department of Corrections State Jail
Inspector recommended a staffing analysis of the Hancock
County Jail (the “Jail”). (Staffing Analysis, ECF
No. 30-1 at 4.) The staffing analysis concluded that:
“The overall lack of staffing [in the Jail] creates a
substantial risk of injury to the current staff and inmate
population.” (Id. at 7.) The analysis advised
Hancock County that eleven full-time jail officer positions
needed to be created because “there are not enough jail
officers to adequately supervise inmates, initiate
activities, or complete other duties that support the
agencies mission” and the “[l]ack of jail
officers often times results in staff not being in proximate
locations to inmate housing areas to provide immediate
response in emergency situations.” (Id. at 19,
7.)
The
analysis also concluded that two jail officers must be
stationed in the control room, the central security of the
jail, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
(Id. at 18.) Two officers were needed because the
surveillance footage in the control room must be monitored at
all times, and control room officers have other duties as
well, including: coordinating inmate visitation, answering
questions from the public concerning release and bail,
checking in attorneys and clergy, opening and unlocking
doors, booking inmates into the Jail, answering the phones,
and monitoring fire and smoke detection equipment and radio
transmission. (Id. at 15; Burkhart Dep. 26:7-15, ECF
No. 30-2.)
The
findings in the staffing analysis were presented to Hancock
County and the Sheriff's Department. (Shepherd Dep.
14:16-15:17, ECF No. 30-3; Burkhart Dep. 19:4-9, ECF No.
30-2.) Every year since 2013, the Sheriff has requested
additional funding from Hancock County in order to hire more
jail officers. (Shepherd Dep. 15:7-16:13, ECF No. 30-3.)
However, only three additional jail officer positions have
been created since 2013. (Shepherd Dep. 16:7-16, ECF No.
30-3; Burkhart Dep. 21:16-24, ECF No. 30-2.) Further, the
control room has never been staffed with more than one
officer at a time. (Shepherd Dep. 59:6-19, ECF No. 30-3;
Burkhart Dep. 26:1-27:3, ECF No. 30-2.)
In May
2013, Ellis was arrested in Hancock County on burglary
charges. (Ellis Dep. 15:9-16:16, ECF No. 22-1.) Ellis told
the police that he committed the burglary with Aaron Robison.
(Id. at 18:6-7.) As a result of the charges, Ellis
was incarcerated at the Jail from May 2013 to June 2014.
(Id. at 22:1-3; Ellis Aff. ¶ 2, ECF No. 30-9.)
Robison was also incarcerated at the Jail for a period of
time, but was housed in a different cell block. (Ellis Aff.
¶ 3, ECF No. 30-9.) Ellis maintains that the Jail had a
policy of housing codefendants in separate cell blocks,
(Id. at ¶ 4; Ellis Dep. 59:1- 60:20), but
Defendants deny such a policy existed. (Defs.' Br. at 6,
ECF No. 23.)
In June
2014, Ellis pleaded guilty to the burglary charges and was
transitioned to the Hancock County Community Corrections
detention facility (the “Facility”) to begin a
work release program. (Ellis Dep. 20:14-20; 22:8-20.) In June
2015, while Ellis was still in the Facility, he had an
interaction with Robison. (Id. at 27:2-10.) Facility
staff warned Ellis that Robison was there, knowing that the
two were code-fendants. (Id. at 27:12-13.) Ellis
approached Robison and told him that he did not want any
problems. (Id. at 27:15-19.) For the rest of
Ellis's time in the Facility, he and Robison stayed away
from each other. (Id.) On July 21, 2015, Ellis left
the Facility and was transferred to home detention.
(Id. at 25:9-16.)
Ellis
violated his home detention on February 9, 2016, and was
taken back to the Facility. (Id. at 31:3-21.) The
next day, February 10, 2016, he was transferred to the Jail.
(Id. at 31:23-24.) When Ellis was booked at the
Jail, a staff member helped him fill out an intake form.
(Id. at 33:7-15.) When asked: “Do you know
anyone you cannot be around that's a danger to you or you
to them?” Ellis responded “No.”
(Id. at 34:20-35:1.) At the time, On February 10,
2016, Robison was not being held at the Jail, but rather was
housed at the Facility. (Id. at 57:13-24.) Ellis was
aware of this. (Id.)
On
April 10 or 11, 2016, [1] Robison was booked at the Jail and put in
Cell Block B, where Ellis was housed. (Probable Cause Aff.,
ECF No. 30-8; Incident Rep., ECF No. 30-7.) Ellis was asleep
in his cell when Robison entered Cell Block B at 10:43 a.m.
(Ellis Dep. 40:15-22; Probable Cause Aff., ECF No. 30-8;
Incident Rep., ECF No. 30-7.) At 11:06:00 a.m., Robison
entered Ellis's cell. (Probable Cause Aff., ECF No. 30-8;
Incident Rep., ECF No. 30-7.) Other inmates in the day room
began looking over towards Ellis's cell. (Id.)
At 11:06:27 a.m., Robison exited Ellis's cell.
(Id.) At 11:07:09 a.m., Robison again entered
Ellis's cell. (Id.) At 11:07:37 a.m., Robison
exited Ellis's cell and began talking to another inmate
in the day room. (Id.) At 11:08:07 a.m., Robison
entered Ellis's cell for the third time. (Id.)
At 11:11:37 a.m., Robison exited Ellis's cell and began
talking to other inmates in the day room. (Id.) At
11:16:12 a.m., Robison entered Ellis's cell for a fourth
time. (Id.) The inmates in the day room turned to
look towards Ellis's cell. (Id.) At 11:18:42
a.m., Robison exited Ellis's cell. (Id.) At
11:20:59 a.m., Robison entered Ellis's cell for the fifth
time and exited at 11:21:08 a.m. (Id.) Robison
entered Ellis's cell for a sixth time at 11:24:09 a.m.
and exited at 11:24:52 a.m. (Id.) Robison entered
Ellis's cell for the last time at 11:28:24 a.m.
(Id.) At 11:29:11 a.m., Robison exited the cell.
(Id.) At some point when Robison was in Ellis's
cell, he attacked Ellis. (Ellis Dep. 41:16-18, ECF No. 22-1.)
At 11:39:29 a.m., Ellis came out of his cell complaining of
jaw pain and spit blood into the trash can. (Probable Cause
Aff., ECF No. 30-8; Incident Rep., ECF No. 30-7.) Ellis
suffered a broken jaw as a result of the incident.
(Id.)
The
cameras in the control room were not being monitored during
this incident. (Evans Dep. 33:20-23, ECF No. 30-4.) Prison
officials reviewed the cameras after the incident to
determine what happened. (Id. at 10:9-21.)
Throughout
Ellis's time in the Jail, from May 2013 to June 2014 and
early 2016, inmate-on-inmate violence was a common, weekly
occurrence. (Ellis Aff. ¶ 14, ECF No. 30-9.)
II.
Legal Standard
Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a) provides that “[t]he
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.” A
genuine issue of material fact exists when “the
evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a
verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v.
Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248
(1986).In considering a motion for summary judgment,
the district court “must construe all the facts and
...