Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00732/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00732-69/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL HOLTSINGER, No. 2:03-cv-00732-MCE-CMK

Plaintiff,

v. FINDINGS OF FACT AND

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

TANYA VOROS,

Defendant.

----oo0oo----

 

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, brings this civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges he was denied

medical treatment by Defendant Voros following an assault by at

least four other inmates. As a result of that assault, 

Plaintiff claims he sustained injuries and was exposed to the

blood of another inmate. 

Following Defendant Voros’ failure to appear for her

deposition, fact establishing sanctions were issued finding

liability on her part for deliberate indifference towards

Plaintiff’s serious medical needs. The only issue remaining for

trial are the damages, if any, owed to Plaintiff. 

Case 2:03-cv-00732-MCE -CMK Document 342 Filed 03/29/10 Page 1 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Plaintiff seeks both compensatory and punitive damages for Eighth

Amendment violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as

reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988.

The matter came on for court trial on March 15, 2010,

against Defendant Tanya Voros, only inasmuch as Plaintiff had

previously dismissed his claims against other Defendants. Carter

C. White, Supervising Attorney, Victoria Baiza, Certified Law

Student, and Christina Ahn, Certified Law Student, appeared on

behalf of Plaintiff. No appearance was made on behalf of

Defendant Tanya Voros.

After hearing the evidence and arguments, the Court makes

the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. 

FINDINGS OF FACT

 

The following facts were deemed established and found to

constitute deliberate indifference on the part of Defendant Voros

as a discovery sanction for failure to appear at her deposition:

a. On June 22, 2002, Defendant was on duty as a

Medical Technical Assistant at High Desert State

Prison, Susanville, California.

b. In Defendant’s working capacity, she was

responsible for the health care needs of inmates

who received injuries in Administrative

Segregation, referral of inmates to the emergency

room, sick call rounds in the housing unit,

dispensing of medication, collection of medical

care request forms, and decontamination of inmates

exposed to blood and basic inmate care needs.

c. At all times relevant to the events described

herein, Defendant acted under color of state law.

d. At all times relevant, Plaintiff was incarcerated

at High Desert State Prison, Susanville,

California.

Case 2:03-cv-00732-MCE -CMK Document 342 Filed 03/29/10 Page 2 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

e. At all times relevant, Plaintiff’s cellmate, Paul

Magnan, was incarcerated at High Desert State

Prison, Susanville, California.

f. On June 22, 2002, at approximately 1300 hours,

after entering the exercise yard, Plaintiff and

Magnan were assaulted. Magnan was assaulted by

two inmates resulting in his loss of consciousness

and bleeding from the head. Plaintiff was

simultaneously assaulted by four inmates resulting

in bodily injury.

g. Plaintiff was placed in a D7-B Section holding

cage after being assaulted.

h. Defendant approached Plaintiff while he was in the

holding cage, at which time Defendant became aware

of Plaintiff’s injuries.

i. Defendant was a responding staff member who saw

that Plaintiff needed medical treatment. 

j. Defendant, producing only a 3” x 3” yellow “PostIt” pad, asked Plaintiff for his name and CDC

number. Defendant stared at Plaintiff’s injured

face and asked who hit him.

k. Defendant instructed Plaintiff to turn around and

lift up his shirt. After Plaintiff struggled to

lift up his shirt, he turned around and found that

Defendant had left the vicinity and took no steps

to provide Plaintiff medical care nor made contact

with him thereafter regarding his injuries.

l. On June 23, 2002, approximately 27 hours after

Plaintiff was assaulted, Defendant failed to

transfer Plaintiff to High Desert State Prison’s

Central Treatment Center. 

m. On June 29, 2002, Defendant came into contact with

Plaintiff. While Defendant was at Plaintiff’s cell

door, he attempted to reiterate his medical needs

to Defendant. Defendant responded, “The Doctor is

aware of you two” (referring to Plaintiff and his

cellmate) and walked away.

n. On June 22, 23, 25, 2002, Plaintiff continued to

contact medical technical assistants regarding his

injuries and urgent need for medical treatment.

o. Defendant’s actions and inactions caused Plaintiff

to be deprived of any medical examination for 59

days after the June 22, 2002 incident. Defendant’s

deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s serious

medical needs caused this delay.

Case 2:03-cv-00732-MCE -CMK Document 342 Filed 03/29/10 Page 3 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

The only facts remaining for adjudication at trial concern

the amount of harm Plaintiff suffered as a result of Defendant’s

deliberate indifference, and the amount of damages resulting

therefrom. In that regard, the Court finds as follows: 

p. Immediately after the assault, Yard Gunner J.

Delgado ordered Plaintiff to drag Magnan off the

yard. Plaintiff complied with Yard Gunner

Delgado’s orders but as Plaintiff dragged Magnan,

Plaintiff was bleeding from his legs and knees and

was exposed to Magnan’s blood. As a result of

coming into contact with his cellmate’s blood,

Plaintiff was fearful of being exposed to

Hepatitis C and HIV. Plaintiff testified that he

thought about it constantly in the beginning, but

as the months continued, he thought about it less

and less. Eventually, it was only a sporadic

thought. 

q. Plaintiff testified he washed his wounds using a

milk carton. He filled it with water from the

sink and cleaned his injuries. He also resorted

to self-treatment such as scrubbing his knees with

a scrub pad. 

r. Plaintiff also testified that he threw away his

boxers, shoes, and socks because they were covered

in blood. Plaintiff believed that it was the

blood of his cellmate.

s. Nurse Kismet A. Mayo testified that Defendant had

a duty to wash the blood off of Plaintiff and

disinfect any wounds. She also had a duty to

inquire as to the origin of the blood. 

t. Plaintiff stated that on the first night, his pain

was a nine out of ten. He said his head felt like

it was on fire, he had pain in his legs, his mouth

was swollen, and he had trouble walking. In

addition, he stated that he went the first night

without any pain reliever. 

u. Plaintiff testified that the week after the

incident, the pain dwindled to an eight out of ten

and by July 2002, the swelling had reduced. 

v. Paul Magnan testified that as a result of his pain

after the incident, Plaintiff fell in the shower

and in the exercise yard. 

///

Case 2:03-cv-00732-MCE -CMK Document 342 Filed 03/29/10 Page 4 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5

w. Plaintiff testified that he was tested for HIV and

Hepatitis C on July 25, 2002 and August 15, 2002. 

He stated that he was tested again in February

2003, June 2003, and at the end of 2003. His

results came back negative. 

x. Nurse Kismet A. Mayo testified that she conducted

the in-prison appeal for Plaintiff. She confirmed

that Defendant did not follow procedures. She

failed to fill out the proper documentation and

failed to get him the proper medical attention the

day of the incident. 

y. Plaintiff claims he continued to be in pain in his

entire upper body, head, knee, neck, back,

shoulder, wrist, and elbow. 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

A. Liability

1. A prison official violates the Eighth Amendment only

when two requirements are met: (1) objectively, the official’s

act or omission must be so serious such that it results in the

denial of the minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities;

and (2) subjectively, the prison official must have acted

unnecessarily and wantonly for the purpose of inflicting harm. 

See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994). Thus, to

violate the Eighth Amendment, a prison official must have a

sufficiently culpable mind.” See id. Here, Defendant Voros was

previously found liable by the magistrate judge. The magistrate

judge found that Defendant Voros was deliberately indifferent to

Plaintiff’s injury, giving rise to liability. See Estelle v.

Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 105 (1976). 

///

///

Case 2:03-cv-00732-MCE -CMK Document 342 Filed 03/29/10 Page 5 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

6

2. Given this sanction imposed by the magistrate judge in

regards to liability, this finding is akin to default. However,

even upon entry of default, the complaint’s factual allegations

regarding liability are taken as true, but allegations regarding

the amount of damages must be proven. Dundee Cement Co. v.

Howard Pipe & Concrete Prods., 722 F.2d 1319, 1323 (7th Cir.

1983)(citing Pope v. United States, 323 U.S. 1, 12 (1944) and

Geddes v. United Financial Group, 559 F.2d 557, 560 (9th Cir.

1977)). “The general rule of law is that upon default the

factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to

the amount of damages, will be taken as true.” Geddes, 559 F.2d

at 560. Thus, the Court must make an independent determination

of the sum to be awarded. 

3. Although the Court finds that Plaintiff has made a good

faith effort to prove damages, the evidence presented at the

hearing was insufficient to warrant entitlement of the $25,000 in

compensatory damages and the $25,000 in punitive damages sought

by Plaintiff. Instead, on the basis of the evidence offered at

trial, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to damages as

follows: 

B. Compensatory Damages

“Compensatory damages may include not only out-of-pocket

loss and other monetary harms, but also such injuries as

impairment of reputation..., personal humiliation, and mental

anguish and suffering.” 

///

Case 2:03-cv-00732-MCE -CMK Document 342 Filed 03/29/10 Page 6 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

7

Memphis Community School District v. Stachura, 477 U.S. 299, 307

(1986) (quoting Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 350

(1974)) (internal quotations omitted). Mental and emotional

distress, including mental suffering and emotional anguish, is a

compensable injury. Carey v. Piphus, 435 U.S. 247, 264 & n. 20

(1978). “Although essentially subjective, genuine injury in this

respect may be evidenced by one’s conduct and observed by

others.” Id. at 264 & n. 20. Further, physical pain and

suffering may support an award of compensatory damages. Jackson

v. Crews, 873 F.2d 1105, 1109 (8th Cir. 1989) 

Plaintiff alleges severe pain in his entire body, head,

knee, neck, back, shoulder, wrist, and elbow following the

June 22, 2002 injury. Plaintiff further alleges that the 59-day

delay in medical treatment exacerbated Plaintiff’s injuries,

prolonged his pain and suffering, and caused him damages. 

Despite his claims that his injuries were severe, Plaintiff

produced no corroborating evidence to support his own assertions

in that regard. There was no testimony with respect to a medical

diagnosis. The only evidence regarding the extent of his

injuries came from Plaintiff’s own observations and the

observations of Plaintiff’s cellmate. Nurse Kismet A. Mayo could

only state what a third party individual witnessed. Further, the

video submitted by Plaintiff documenting the fight shows a short

scuffle between Plaintiff and the other men in the yard in which

Plaintiff falls to his knees on two occasions. The video does

not show “severe injuries” warranting an award of $25,000. The

Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to $500.00 in compensatory

damages.

Case 2:03-cv-00732-MCE -CMK Document 342 Filed 03/29/10 Page 7 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

8

 C. Punitive Damages

While compensatory damages are mandatory once liability is

found, punitive damages are discretionary. Smith v. Wade, 461

U.S. 30, 54 (1983). “The purpose of punitive damages is to

punish the defendant for his willful or malicious conduct and to

deter others from similar behavior.” Memphis Community School

District, 477 U.S. at 306 n.9. “The focus, in determining the

propriety of punitive damages, is on the intent of the defendant

and whether the defendant’s conduct is of the sort that calls for

deterrence and punishment over and above that provided by

compensatory awards.” Coleman v. Rahija, 114 F.3d 778, 787 (8th

Cir. 1997) (citing Smith, 461 U.S. at 54). Punitive damages are

appropriate “when the defendant’s conduct is shown to be

motivated by evil motive or intent, or when it involves reckless

or callous indifference to the federally protected rights of

others.” Smith, 461 U.S. at 56. “A finding of deliberate

indifference to a serious medical need, while establishing

liability under § 1983, does not necessitate a finding of callous

indifference warranting punitive damages.” Coleman, 114 F.3d at

787. 

In this matter, punitive damages are not appropriate. 

Plaintiff failed to make the requisite showing of callous

indifference. The Plaintiff’s own witness, Nurse Kismet A. Mayo,

stated that Defendant Voros’ conduct did not exhibit such

indifference.

///

///

Case 2:03-cv-00732-MCE -CMK Document 342 Filed 03/29/10 Page 8 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

9

In sum, this Court finds that judgment shall be entered in

favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant Voros. Damages shall be

awarded for violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the sum of $500.00 in

compensatory damages and $0 in punitive damages. 

Any request for attorney’s fees by Plaintiff, as prevailing

party herein, shall be made pursuant to Local Rule 293. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 26, 2010

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:03-cv-00732-MCE -CMK Document 342 Filed 03/29/10 Page 9 of 9