United States District Court, D. Montana, Missoula Division
L. Christensen, United States District Court Chief Judge
States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch entered his
Findings and Recommendation in this § 1983 case on
February 20, 2019, recommending that the Court: (1) grant the
motions for summary judgment of Defendants Chuck Curry,
Jennifer Root, and CBM Managed Services ("CBM")
regarding Plaintiff Danny Lee Warner, Jr.'s claims for
inadequate food and nutrition; (2) deny the motion for
summary judgment of Defendant James Dusing, M.D.; and (3)
deny the motions for summary judgment of Root and Schuelen as
to Warner's claim for unlawful punishment. (Doc. 108.)
Warner's claims against Defendants Curry, Root, Schuelen,
and Bowen have since been dismissed with prejudice (Doc.
116), and the Court will accordingly review only Warner's
claims against Defendants CBM and Dusing in this Order.
Dusing timely filed objections to the Findings and
Recommendation, and Warner replied to Dusing's
objections. (Docs. 110 & 112.) Consequently, Dusing is
entitled to de novo review of those findings and
recommendations to which he has specifically objected. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Absent objection, this Court
reviews findings and recommendations for clear error.
United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121
(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S.
140, 149 (1985). Clear error exists if the Court is left with
a "definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been
committed." United States v. Syrax, 235 F.3d
422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted).
CBM Managed Services
Lynch recommended granting summary judgment to CBM, which
provided meals to Warner when he was a pretrial detainee
housed at the Flathead County Detention. Because there are no
objections to this portion of the Findings and
Recommendation, the Court reviews for clear error. The Court
finds no clear error in Judge Lynch's determination that
CBM did not act with deliberate indifference to Warner's
health or safety. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S.
825, 837 (1994).
Dusing timely objected to the Findings and Recommendation,
the Court reviews de novo whether he is entitled to summary
judgment. The Court finds that there is no material dispute
of fact and that Dusing is entitled to judgment as a matter
of law. Accordingly, it will grant Dusing's motion for
summary judgment and dismiss Warner's remaining claims
alleges that Dusing violated Warner's Fourteenth
Amendment due process rights by failing to adequately manage
his health care during Warner's pretrial detention.
"[M]edical care claims brought by pretrial detainees ...
'arise under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process
Clause, rather than under the Eighth Amendment's Cruel
and Unusual Punishment Clause.'" Gordon v. Cty.
of Orange, 888 F.3d 1118, 1124 (9th Cir. 2018) (quoting
Castro v. Cty. of Los Angeles, 833 F.3d 1060,
1069-70 (9th Cir. 2016)). Such claims are "evaluated
under an objective deliberate indifference standard."
Id. at 1125. A successful claim satisfies four
(i) the defendant made an intentional decision with respect
to the conditions under which the plaintiff was confined;
(ii) those conditions put the plaintiff at substantial risk
of suffering serious harm;
(iii) the defendant did not take reasonable available
measures to abate that risk, even though a reasonable
official in the circumstances would have appreciated the high
degree of risk involved-making the consequences of the
defendant's conduct obvious; and
(iv) by not taking such measures, the defendant caused the
Id. The third element demands that the
"defendant's conduct... be objectively unreasonable,
a test that will necessarily 'turn on the facts and
circumstances of each particular case.'"
Castro, 833 F.3d at 1071 (quoting Kingsley v.
Hendrickson, 135 S.Ct. 2466, 2473 (2015)).
alleges that he sought treatment for pain and that Dr. Dusing
failed to adequately respond to his medical needs. When
Warner was placed in the detention center, he was in a
"tremendous amount of pain" due to preexisting
injuries to his neck, back, and hip. (Doc. 64-1 at 4.) Prior
to his detention, Warner took Gabapentin, a ...