## United States Court of App eals
F O R T H E E I G H T H

C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 1- 20 46

__ __ __ __ __ _ Lato y in Davi s, *
* App el la nt , *
* App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s v. * Dis tri ctCo ur t fo r th e Eas te rn * Dis tri ctof Ark an sa s. Co rrec ti on al Med ic al Serv ic es ; Se lv ey , * Nur se , Nort h C en tra l Un it , ADC; * [UNPUBLISHED] Hol lo way , Direc to r, CMS , Nort h * Cen tra l Un it , ADC; Cu rti s M ei nz er, * W ard en , Nort h C en tra l Un it , ADC; * Ark an sa s Dep art m en t o f Co rrec ti on ; * Hun t, Nu rs e, Nor th Cen tra l Un it , * ADC; Laf

ev ers , Nurs e, Nor th Cen tra l * Uni t, ADC, *
* App el le es

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _ Su bm it te d: Nov em

be r 22 , 20 11 Fi le d: Decem

be r 1, 2 01 1

__ __ __ __ __ _ Befo re LOKEN, BYE, an d C OLLOTO N, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ _ PER CURI AM.In m at e Lato y in Dav is ap pe al s fo ll owi ng th e d is tri ctco ur t’s ad ve rs e g ran t of 1

su m m ary jud gm en t in hi s 42 U.S.C. § 19 83 act io n. To th e ex te nt Dav is ch al le ng es th e earl ie r di sm is sa l of Co rrec ti on al Med ic al Serv ic es (CM S), we co nc lu de th at CMS

was pr op erl y di sm is se d as Dav is was pr oc eed in g ag ai n s t i t ba se d so le ly on th e
co nd uc t of it s em

pl oyees. See McAd am s v. McC or d, 58 4 F.3 d 11 11 , 11 13 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (d e no vo rev ie w of di sm is sa l fo r fai lu re to st at e cl ai m ); San de rs v. Sear s, Ro eb uc k & Co ., 98 4 F.2 d 97 2, 97 5- 76 (8 th Ci r. 19 93 ) (co rp or at e li ab il it y u n de r § 19 83 ). It was al so pr op e r t o g r a nt su m m ary jud gm en t on th e cl ai m s ag ai ns t th e CMS em pl oyees. Se e Mas on v. Co rr. Med . S erv s., In c., 55 9 F.3 d 8 80 , 88 4- 85 (8t h Ci r. 20 09 ) (d e no vo rev ie w). Und er th e ci rcu m st an ces es ta bl is he d by th e reco rd , th e
nu rs e de fen da nt s were at m os t ne gl ig en t, se e Lan gf or d v. Norris , 61 4 F.3 d 44 5, 46 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (p la in ti ff m us t sh ow m or e th an ev en gr os s ne gl ig en ce, a n d m ere di sa gr ee men t wit h tre at m en t de ci si on s do es no t ris e to le ve l of co ns ti tu ti on al vi ol at io n) ; D a v i s di d no t co un te r th e ev id en ce th at th e CMS ad m in is tra to r m erel y
arra ng ed fo r tra ns po rta ti on on ce th e or th op ed ic co nsul ta tio n for Dav is was sc he du le d,

se e Bl oo m v. Met ro Heart Gro up of St

. Lou is , In c., 44 0 F.3 d 10 25 , 10 28 -2 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ) (n on m ov in g pa rty m us t de m on st rat e di sp ut e on m at eri al is su e of fact th at m ig ht affe ct ou tc om e of su it un de r g o v ern in g la w so th at reas on ab le jury co ul d ret ur n
ve rd ic t in hi s fav or ); an d we ag ree wit h th e di st ric t c o ur t th at th e ad m in is tra to r’s al le ge d am

us em en t ab ou t th e si tu at io n was no t a ba si s fo r a co ns ti tu ti on al cl ai m un de r
se ct io n 19 83

. Fi na ll y , we f i nd no m eri t to Dav is ’s as se rti on of jud ic ia l bi as

. The di st ric t co ur t i s af

fir m ed

. 2

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The Hon or ab le Je ro m e Kearn ey , U n i t e d St at es Mag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e 1 East ern Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s, to who m th e cas e was refe rred fo r fin al di sp os it io n by
co ns en t o f th e p art ie s p ur su an t t o 2 8 U.S.C. § 63 6( c).
W e de cl in e to ad dr es s th e cl ai m s Dav is ha s ab an do ne d on ap pe al

. See Grif fit h 2 v. Ci ty of Des Mo in es , 38 7 F .3d 73 3, 7 39 (8t h C ir. 2 00 4)

. -2

-