No Eighth Amendment Violation in Cellmate Attack
No Eighth Amendment Violation in Cellmate Attack
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit dismissed a lawsuit filed by an inmate who suffered injuries after claiming that prison staff failed to heed his warnings that his cellmate was about to attack him.
Wisconsin prisoner Jeffrey Olson said he told prison staff that his cellmate was not taking his medications and might become violent toward him. Olson said he requested a new cell, but that request was ignored.
The nest day Olson was attacked by his cellmate and suffered a broken tooth in the scuffle.
In his suit, Olson also alleged that he received inadequate treatment by prison medical staff following the attack.
Olson's suit, filed in the District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, argued that a prison sergeant violated his Eighth Amendment rights by not doing more to protect him, and that medical staff also violated his Eighth Amendment rights by delaying treatment of his tooth for several weeks. Olson's many requests for counsel were denied by the district court.
On summary judgment, the Court dismissed all of Olson's claims, and Olson appealed. His main argument on appeal was that the district court should have appointed a lawyer to represent him.
The Court of Appeals first ruled that Olson did not need a lawyer because he was competent to represent himself and the case was not unduly complex. The Court cited Olson's pleadings in the earlier stages of the litigation and decided the lower court properly rejected his request for a lawyer.
Affirming the remainder of the district court's dismissal of his suit, the Court held that Olson presented no evidence "from which a reasonable person could conclude that the sergeant knew that Olson faced a substantial risk of harm from" his cellmate. Even though acknowledging that Olson told the sergeant of his concerns that he would be attacked, "prison guards are neither required nor expected to believe everything inmates tell them," the Court wrote.
Finally, in upholding the dismissal of Olson's medical indifference claim, the Court found that there was no evidence that prison medical staff were aware that Olson had a serious medical need because Olson only requested some aspirin, and there was no evidence that medical staff were aware of his urgent needs and ignored them. See: Olson v. Morgan, 750 F.3d 708 (7th Cir. Wis. 2014).
Related legal case
Olson v. Morgan
| Year | 2014 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 750 F.3d 708 (7th Cir. Wis. 2014) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |