News Articles
This site contains over 2,000 news articles, legal briefs and publications related to for-profit companies that provide correctional services. Most of the content under the "Articles" tab below is from our Prison Legal News site. PLN, a monthly print publication, has been reporting on criminal justice-related issues, including prison privatization, since 1990. If you are seeking pleadings or court rulings in lawsuits and other legal proceedings involving private prison companies, search under the "Legal Briefs" tab. For reports, audits and other publications related to the private prison industry, search using the "Publications" tab.
For any type of search, click on the magnifying glass icon to enter one or more keywords, and you can refine your search criteria using "More search options." Note that searches for "CCA" and "Corrections Corporation of America" will return different results.
Eighth Circuit Upholds Judgment Against CMS For Delayed Dental Care
In an unpublished opinion filed on August 7, 2001, the U.S. Eighth Circuit
Court of Appeals upheld a judgment against Correctional Medical Services
(CMS) for failing to provide adequate dental care to a Missouri prisoner.
While imprisoned in the Missouri Department of Corrections (MDOC),
plaintiff Edward Allen Moore sued CMS and various MDOC medical personnel
for failing to timely provide him dental care and for mishandling medical
service requests (MSRs). The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Missouri pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state
tort law. Prior to trial the court dismissed several defendant prison
employees and Moore's state law claims. A jury subsequently acquitted a
prison doctor and nurse of wrongdoing but entered a judgment against CMS.
Both parties appealed and the Eighth Circuit affirmed.
With regard to Moore's appeal, the appellate court held that the prison
defendants were properly dismissed because "Moore failed to create trial
worthy issues on whether these defendants knew of and refused to remedy an
objectively serious deprivation of dental care, or ignored his allegations
that MSRs were being discarded." The Court further held that Moore's state
law claims were invalid because he had failed to provide an affidavit of
merit as required by Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.225 (2000), and that the trial
court had not abused its discretion.
The appellate court also upheld the trial court's denial of CMS's motion
for judgment as a matter of law. CMS had argued that the verdict against it
was inconsistent, both with the trial court's dismissal of the prison
doctor and nurse, and with the appellate court's previous ruling affirming
the trial court's grant of summary judgment to other prison personnel. See
Moore v. Jackson, 123 F.3d 1082 (8th Cir. 1997). The Court held, however,
that the claims against CMS involved different elements than those against
the other defendants. The Court further held that given the wording of the
jury instruction, it could not say that no reasonable jury could have found
for Moore. Consequently, the judgment against CMS was upheld. See: Moore v.
Jackson, 16 Fed.Appx. 517 (8th Cir. 2001) (unpublished).
Court of Appeals upheld a judgment against Correctional Medical Services
(CMS) for failing to provide adequate dental care to a Missouri prisoner.
While imprisoned in the Missouri Department of Corrections (MDOC),
plaintiff Edward Allen Moore sued CMS and various MDOC medical personnel
for failing to timely provide him dental care and for mishandling medical
service requests (MSRs). The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Missouri pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state
tort law. Prior to trial the court dismissed several defendant prison
employees and Moore's state law claims. A jury subsequently acquitted a
prison doctor and nurse of wrongdoing but entered a judgment against CMS.
Both parties appealed and the Eighth Circuit affirmed.
With regard to Moore's appeal, the appellate court held that the prison
defendants were properly dismissed because "Moore failed to create trial
worthy issues on whether these defendants knew of and refused to remedy an
objectively serious deprivation of dental care, or ignored his allegations
that MSRs were being discarded." The Court further held that Moore's state
law claims were invalid because he had failed to provide an affidavit of
merit as required by Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.225 (2000), and that the trial
court had not abused its discretion.
The appellate court also upheld the trial court's denial of CMS's motion
for judgment as a matter of law. CMS had argued that the verdict against it
was inconsistent, both with the trial court's dismissal of the prison
doctor and nurse, and with the appellate court's previous ruling affirming
the trial court's grant of summary judgment to other prison personnel. See
Moore v. Jackson, 123 F.3d 1082 (8th Cir. 1997). The Court held, however,
that the claims against CMS involved different elements than those against
the other defendants. The Court further held that given the wording of the
jury instruction, it could not say that no reasonable jury could have found
for Moore. Consequently, the judgment against CMS was upheld. See: Moore v.
Jackson, 16 Fed.Appx. 517 (8th Cir. 2001) (unpublished).
Related legal case
Moore v. Jackson
| Year | 2001 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 16 Fed.Appx. 517 (8th Cir. 2001) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |
| Attorney Fees | 0 |
| Damages | 0 |
| Injunction Status | N/A |
Edward Allen Moore, Appellant, v. Ernest-Jackson, D.D.S.; Randee Kaiser; Karen Cornell; Gerald Bommel; Steve Long; John Sydow; Judy P. Draper; Dora Schriro; William Wade, M. D.; Richard Washington; David Dormire; Michael Groose; Correctional Medical Services, Appellees. Edward Allen Moore, Appellee, v. Ernest-Jackson, D.D.S.; Randee Kaiser; Karen Cornell; Gerald Bommel; Steve Long; John Sydow; Judy P. Draper; Dora Schriro; William Wade, M. D.; Richard Washington; David Dormire; Michael Groose, Defendants, ARA Services, doing business as Correctional Medical Systems, Inc., Appellant.
No. 00-3731, No. 00-3733
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
16 Fed. Appx. 517; 2001 U.S. App.
April 27, 2001, Submitted
August 7, 2001, Filed
NOTICE: [**1] RULES OF THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.
SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: Certiorari Denied April 22, 2002, Reported at: 2002 U.S. . Writ of certiorari denied Moore v. Jackson, 535 U.S. 1023, 152 L. Ed. 2d 630, 122 S. Ct. 1618, 2002 U.S. (2002)
Related proceeding at State ex rel. Nixon v. Moore, 2003 Mo. App. (Mo. Ct. App., May 13, 2003)
Subsequent appeal at, Remanded by, Motion denied by Moore v. Jackson, 2003 U.S. App. (8th Cir. Mo., July 28, 2003)
PRIOR HISTORY: Appeals from the United States No. 00-3733 District Court for the Western District of Missouri. State v. Moore, 882 S.W.2d 253, 1994 Mo. App. (Mo. Ct. App., 1994)
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.
COUNSEL: EDWARD ALLEN MOORE, Plaintiff - Appellant (00-3731, 00-3733), Pro se, Bowling Green, MO.
For ERNEST - JACKSON, D.D.S., KAREN CORNELL, Defendants - Appellees (00-3731): Gary Phillip Paul, Lawrence R. Smith, BRINKER & DOYEN, St. Louis, MO. John Joseph Treu, CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, Jefferson City, MO.
For GERALD BOMMEL, Defendant - Appellee (00-3731): Doug Leyshock, ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, Jefferson City, MO.
For JUDY P. DRAPER, DORA SCHRIRO, Defendants - Appellees (00-3731): Megan Lynn Brackney, ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, Jefferson City, MO.
For WILLIAM WADE, M.D., Defendant - Appellee (00-3731): John Joseph Treu, CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, Jefferson City, MO.
For CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, Defendant - Appellee: Gary Phillip Paul, Lawrence R. Smith, BRINKER & DOYEN, St. Louis, MO. John Joseph Treu, CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, Jefferson City, MO.
For ARA SERVICES, Defendant - Appellant (00-3733): Gary Phillip Paul, Lawrence R. Smith, BRINKER & DOYEN, St. Louis, MO.
JUDGES: Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, BRIGHT, and BOWMAN, Circuit [**2] Judges.
OPINION: [*518]
PER CURIAM.
These are consolidated appeals following a jury trial in Missouri inmate Edward Allen Moore's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, which was based on allegations about a delay in receiving dental care, and mishandling of medical service requests (MSRs). Moore appeals (1) the district court's n1 pretrial dismissals of Missouri Department of Correction and Jefferson City Correctional Center employees (collectively, "Correctional defendants"), Dr. William Wade, and Moore's state-law claims; and (2) the court's entry of judgment upon the jury's verdicts in favor of Dr. Ernest Jackson and Nurse Karen Cornell, and against Correctional Medical Services, Inc. (CMS). CMS cross-appeals the denial of its motion for judgment as a matter of law (JAML). We affirm.
n1 The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
As to Moore's appeal, we conclude that (1) summary judgment was properly granted to Correctional defendants, as Moore [**3] failed to create trialworthy issues on whether these defendants knew of and refused to remedy an objectively serious deprivation of dental care, or ignored his allegations that MSRs were being discarded, see Tlamka v. Serrell, 244 F.3d 628, 632-33 (8th Cir. 2001); (2) the court properly dismissed Moore's state-law claims for failure to comply with a Missouri statute requiring an affidavit of merit in cases involving personal injury related to the rendering of, or failure to render, health care services, see Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.225 (2000); (3) although Moore technically may have stated an Eighth Amendment claim against Dr. Wade, the record contains no evidence of Dr. Wade's involvement in the wrongs alleged by Moore; and (4) the court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Moore's motions to compel discovery, see Moran v. Clarke, 247 F.3d 799, 807 (8th Cir. 2001), denied his motion to amend his complaint, see Brown v. Wallace, 957 F.2d 564, 565-66 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam), excluded the trial testimony of three inmate witnesses, see Moran, 247 F.3d at 806, limited Moore's cross-examination of Dr. Jackson, [**4] see Villanueva v. Leininger, 707 F.2d 1007, 1010 (8th Cir. 1983) (per curiam), and controlled closing arguments, see Harris v. Steelweld Equip. Co., 869 F.2d 396, 404-05 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 817, 107 L. Ed. 2d 37, 110 S. Ct. 70 (1989).
As to the cross-appeal, we reject CMS's argument that the verdict against it was inconsistent with the verdict in favor of Dr. Jackson and Nurse Cornell, and with our conclusion in Moore's previous appeal that summary judgment was properly granted to other CMS employees. See Moore v. Jackson, 123 F.3d 1082 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam). The claim against CMS involved different elements than the claims against Dr. Jackson and Nurse Cornell as articulated in the jury instructions, see Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. John Labatt Ltd., 89 F.3d 1339, 1347 (8th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1109, 136 L. Ed. 2d 833, 117 S. Ct. 944 (1997); likewise, the claims against the CMS employees before us in the prior appeal were unlike those against CMS, see Moore, 123 F.3d at 1086-87.
We also reject CMS's contention that the evidence [**5] did not meet the elements of the applicable jury instruction. Given the wording of the instruction at issue -- which [*519] did not use the words "official" before "policy" or "final" before "policymakers," and did not define "policy," see Mettler v. Whitledge, 165 F.3d 1197, 1204 (8th Cir. 1999) -- we cannot say that no reasonable jury could have found for Moore, see Moring v. Ark. Dep't of Corr., 243 F.3d 452, 455 (8th Cir. 2001) (denial of JAML motion is reviewed de novo, viewing evidence in light most favorable to non-moving party and giving extreme deference to jury's verdict).
Accordingly, we affirm.
No. 00-3731, No. 00-3733
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
16 Fed. Appx. 517; 2001 U.S. App.
April 27, 2001, Submitted
August 7, 2001, Filed
NOTICE: [**1] RULES OF THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.
SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: Certiorari Denied April 22, 2002, Reported at: 2002 U.S. . Writ of certiorari denied Moore v. Jackson, 535 U.S. 1023, 152 L. Ed. 2d 630, 122 S. Ct. 1618, 2002 U.S. (2002)
Related proceeding at State ex rel. Nixon v. Moore, 2003 Mo. App. (Mo. Ct. App., May 13, 2003)
Subsequent appeal at, Remanded by, Motion denied by Moore v. Jackson, 2003 U.S. App. (8th Cir. Mo., July 28, 2003)
PRIOR HISTORY: Appeals from the United States No. 00-3733 District Court for the Western District of Missouri. State v. Moore, 882 S.W.2d 253, 1994 Mo. App. (Mo. Ct. App., 1994)
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.
COUNSEL: EDWARD ALLEN MOORE, Plaintiff - Appellant (00-3731, 00-3733), Pro se, Bowling Green, MO.
For ERNEST - JACKSON, D.D.S., KAREN CORNELL, Defendants - Appellees (00-3731): Gary Phillip Paul, Lawrence R. Smith, BRINKER & DOYEN, St. Louis, MO. John Joseph Treu, CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, Jefferson City, MO.
For GERALD BOMMEL, Defendant - Appellee (00-3731): Doug Leyshock, ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, Jefferson City, MO.
For JUDY P. DRAPER, DORA SCHRIRO, Defendants - Appellees (00-3731): Megan Lynn Brackney, ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, Jefferson City, MO.
For WILLIAM WADE, M.D., Defendant - Appellee (00-3731): John Joseph Treu, CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, Jefferson City, MO.
For CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, Defendant - Appellee: Gary Phillip Paul, Lawrence R. Smith, BRINKER & DOYEN, St. Louis, MO. John Joseph Treu, CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, Jefferson City, MO.
For ARA SERVICES, Defendant - Appellant (00-3733): Gary Phillip Paul, Lawrence R. Smith, BRINKER & DOYEN, St. Louis, MO.
JUDGES: Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, BRIGHT, and BOWMAN, Circuit [**2] Judges.
OPINION: [*518]
PER CURIAM.
These are consolidated appeals following a jury trial in Missouri inmate Edward Allen Moore's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, which was based on allegations about a delay in receiving dental care, and mishandling of medical service requests (MSRs). Moore appeals (1) the district court's n1 pretrial dismissals of Missouri Department of Correction and Jefferson City Correctional Center employees (collectively, "Correctional defendants"), Dr. William Wade, and Moore's state-law claims; and (2) the court's entry of judgment upon the jury's verdicts in favor of Dr. Ernest Jackson and Nurse Karen Cornell, and against Correctional Medical Services, Inc. (CMS). CMS cross-appeals the denial of its motion for judgment as a matter of law (JAML). We affirm.
n1 The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
As to Moore's appeal, we conclude that (1) summary judgment was properly granted to Correctional defendants, as Moore [**3] failed to create trialworthy issues on whether these defendants knew of and refused to remedy an objectively serious deprivation of dental care, or ignored his allegations that MSRs were being discarded, see Tlamka v. Serrell, 244 F.3d 628, 632-33 (8th Cir. 2001); (2) the court properly dismissed Moore's state-law claims for failure to comply with a Missouri statute requiring an affidavit of merit in cases involving personal injury related to the rendering of, or failure to render, health care services, see Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.225 (2000); (3) although Moore technically may have stated an Eighth Amendment claim against Dr. Wade, the record contains no evidence of Dr. Wade's involvement in the wrongs alleged by Moore; and (4) the court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Moore's motions to compel discovery, see Moran v. Clarke, 247 F.3d 799, 807 (8th Cir. 2001), denied his motion to amend his complaint, see Brown v. Wallace, 957 F.2d 564, 565-66 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam), excluded the trial testimony of three inmate witnesses, see Moran, 247 F.3d at 806, limited Moore's cross-examination of Dr. Jackson, [**4] see Villanueva v. Leininger, 707 F.2d 1007, 1010 (8th Cir. 1983) (per curiam), and controlled closing arguments, see Harris v. Steelweld Equip. Co., 869 F.2d 396, 404-05 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 817, 107 L. Ed. 2d 37, 110 S. Ct. 70 (1989).
As to the cross-appeal, we reject CMS's argument that the verdict against it was inconsistent with the verdict in favor of Dr. Jackson and Nurse Cornell, and with our conclusion in Moore's previous appeal that summary judgment was properly granted to other CMS employees. See Moore v. Jackson, 123 F.3d 1082 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam). The claim against CMS involved different elements than the claims against Dr. Jackson and Nurse Cornell as articulated in the jury instructions, see Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. John Labatt Ltd., 89 F.3d 1339, 1347 (8th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1109, 136 L. Ed. 2d 833, 117 S. Ct. 944 (1997); likewise, the claims against the CMS employees before us in the prior appeal were unlike those against CMS, see Moore, 123 F.3d at 1086-87.
We also reject CMS's contention that the evidence [**5] did not meet the elements of the applicable jury instruction. Given the wording of the instruction at issue -- which [*519] did not use the words "official" before "policy" or "final" before "policymakers," and did not define "policy," see Mettler v. Whitledge, 165 F.3d 1197, 1204 (8th Cir. 1999) -- we cannot say that no reasonable jury could have found for Moore, see Moring v. Ark. Dep't of Corr., 243 F.3d 452, 455 (8th Cir. 2001) (denial of JAML motion is reviewed de novo, viewing evidence in light most favorable to non-moving party and giving extreme deference to jury's verdict).
Accordingly, we affirm.
