FILED U.S. COURT OF A P P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IR C U IT FEB RUARY 5, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 14545 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 05 -014 17 -C V -C C -1 G E R M A N D U Q U E , P la in tif f
- A p p e lla n t,
v ersu s U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e , I V A N N E G R O N , e t a l., D e f e n d a n ts .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o r th e r n D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( F e b r u ar y 5, 2007) B efo re M A R C U S , W IL S O N an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:Duque also named various indivi duals in his complaint, including medical doctors at the 1 priso n a nd c ontr a c t ho sp ital. Thedis tric t c ourt dis mi ss ed th eseindivi du a ls f ro m th e laws uit , howeve r, o n th e gro un d s that the United States is the only proper defendant in an ac tion brought un de r t heF TCA . D uq

uedo e s n ot c halle ng e thi s r uli ngon a pp e a l. 2 G er m an D u q u e, a f

e d e r a l p riso n er fili n g p ro se , ap p ea ls th e d istrict co u rt’s
e ntr y of s um m a r y j ud g m en t , i n favorof the U ni t e d S t a t e s , on hi s c l a i m s unde rthe 1 F e d e r a l T o r t C la im s A c t ( “F T C A ” ) , 2 8 U .S .C . § § 1 3 4 6 ( b ) ( 1 ) , 2 6 7 4 . O n a p p e a l, D uq ue ar gu es thatthe di stri ctcourter re d (1) by f i nd i ng thatthe m edi ca l
c ontr a c t or s w ho tr e a t e d hi m w e r e note m pl oy e e s of the f e de r a l gove r nm e nt , a nd ( 2) by f i ndi ng no e vi de nc e f

r om w hi c h a r e a s ona bl e f a c t f i nde r c oul d c onc l ude tha tthe
m edi ca l st af

f atthe U ni t ed S t at es P eni t ent i ar y i n A t l ant a ( “ U S P A t l ant a” ) bre ac hed its d u ty to p r o v id e h im w ith m e d ic a l c a r e . A f te rc a r e f u l r e v ie w , w e a f

f ir m . W e c on du c ta de no vo r e vi e w of a di s tr i c tc ou r t ’ s or de rgr a nt i ng s ummary j u d g m e n t , “ a p p l y i n g th e s a m e l e g a l s t a n d a r d s a s th e d i s tr i c t c o u r t . ” Ch a p ma n v . AI T r a n s p ., 2 2 9 F . 3 d 1 0 1 2 , 1 0 2 3 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) ( e n b a n c ) . “S u m m a r y ju d g m e n t is approp ri ate if th e e vi dence before the courtshow s ‘ thatthere i s no g enui ne i ss ue as t o a ny m at er i al fa ct and that the m ov i ng party i s ent i t l ed t o a j ud gm ent as a m att er of l a w . ’ I n m ak i ng thi s de t e r m i na t i on, the c our tm us tvi e w a l l e vi de nc e a nd m a ke
a ll r e a s o n a b le in f

e r e n c e s in f

a v o ro f t h e p a r ty o p p o s in g s u m m a r y ju d g m e n t.” H a ve s v. C i ty of

M i a m i , 52 F . 3d 918, 921 ( 11th C i r . 1995) ( c i t a t i ons om i t t e d)
. T he
s um m a r y j udgm e ntm ova ntbe a r s the i ni t i a l bur de n o f sh o w i ng the c our t , by3

r e f e r e nc e t o the reco rd , t ha tno ge nui ne i s s ue s of m a t e r i a l f

a c te xi s tt o be det er m i ned attri al
. C l ar k v
. C oat s & C l ar k, Inc. , 92 9 F .2 d 6 0 4, 60 8 (11 th C i r. 1991)
. T he m ova ntm e et s t h i s bur de n by s how i ng tha tthe r e i s a n “ a bs e nc e of
e vi de nc e t o su p p o rtthe non- m ovi ng pa r ty ’ s c a s e . ” J e f f e r y v. S a r a s ot a W hi t e S ox, Inc. , 64 F . 3d 59 0, 59 3 (11 th C ir
. 19 95 ). O nce thi s i ni t i al bu rden i s m et , the ot her p art y m u st“ g o b eyo n d th e p l ead i n g s, an d b y i t s o w n affi d av i t s, o r b y d ep o si t i o n s, a ns w e r s t o i nt e r r oga t or i e s , a nd a dm i s s i ons on f i l e , de s i gna t e sp eci fi c f a c t s s how i ng tha t the r e i s a ge nui ne i s s ue f or tr i a l
. ” I d. a t 593- 94 ( c i t a t i ons a n d q u o t at i ons o m itte d )
. T he FTCA i mp o s e s c i v i l l i a b i l i ty o n th e U n i t e d St a t e s f o r “ i n j u r y o r l o s s of pr ope r ty , orpe r s ona l i nj ur y orde a th c a us e d by the ne gl i ge ntorw r ong ful a c tor o m is s io n o f

a n y e m p lo y e e o f

th e G o v e r n m e n t w h ile a c tin g w ith in th e s c o p e o f h is
o f f ic e o re m p lo y m e n t, u n d e r c i r c u m s ta n c e s w h e r e th e U n ite d S ta te s , if a p r iv a te pers on , w ou l d b e l i abl e t o t he cl ai m anti n acc ordance w it h t he l aw of the pl ac e w here the ac tor om i ss i on occurre d. ” 28 U . S . C . § 1 34 6(b). Iti s w el l -e st abl i shed th atfo r th e U n i t e d S ta te s to b e l i ab l e u n d er th e F T C A , th e al l eg ed t o rt feaso r m u st be an em pl oyee of the go vernm ent . P att er son & W il d er C on str. C o. v. U ni t ed S t at es , 22 6 F . 3d 1 2 6 9 , 1 2 73 -74 (11 th C i r. 20 00 ). U nd erthe F T C A , an “ em pl oyee of the G ove r nm e nt ” i nc l ude s “ of f i c e r s ore m pl oy e e s of

a ny f e de r a l a ge nc y . . . a nd4

pe r s ons a c t i ng on be ha l f of a f e de r a l a ge nc y i n a n o f

f i c i a l c a pa c i ty , t e m por a r i l y or pe r ma n e n t l y i n th e s e r v i c e o f th e U n i t e d St a t e s , w h e th e rw i th o rw i t hout
c om pe ns a t i on. ” 28 U . S . C . § 2 671. T hus , pr i va t e i ndi vi dua l s w ho a r e noton the gove r nm e nt ’ s pa y r ol l m a y be c ons i d ered e m pl oy e e s f orthe purpos e of

e s t a bl i s hi ng th e g o v e r n m e n t ’ s l i a b i l i ty u n d e rth e F T C A. Pa t t e r s o n , 2 2 6 F . 3 d a t1 2 7 4 . “ [ A] pe r s on i s a n e m pl oy e e of the G ove r nm e nt i f the G ove r nm e nt c o n t ro l s and
s upe r vi s e s the da y - t o- da y a c t i vi t i e s of the a l l e ge d t or t f

e a s ordur i ng the r e l e va nt tim e .” I d . T o s a tis f

y th is te s t, it is n o t n e c e s s a r y f o rth e g o v e r n m e n t to c o n tin u a lly
c ontr ol a l l a s pe c t s of

the i ndi vi dua l ’ s a c t i vi t i e s , s o l ong a s i tha s th e au t h or i ty t o do
s o g iv e n th e n a tu r e o f

th e ta s k . I d
. W he n a na l y z i ng a F T C A c l a i m , w e a ppl y the l a w of the s t a t e i n w hi c h the
a lle g ed t o rt w as co m m i t t ed
. S ee S t o n e v . U n i t ed S t at es, 3 7 3 F . 3 d 1 1 2 9 , 1 1 3 0 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2004)
. U nde r G e or gi a l a w , “ [ a ] pe r s on pr of e s s i ng t o pr a c t i c e s ur g ery o r the
a d m in i s t e r i n g o f

m e d ic in e f

o rc o m p e n s a tio n m u s t b r in g to th e e x e r c is e o f h is pr of e s s i on a r e a s ona bl e de gr e e of c a re an d sk i l l
. ” G a . C ode A nn. § 51- 1- 27 (200 6 ). F ro m thi s s t atut e, G eorgi a c ou rt s have deri ved t he fol l ow i ng three
e l e m e nt s t o e s t a bl i s h l i a bi l i ty i n a m e di c a l m a l pr a c t i c e c l a i m : “ ( 1) the duty i nhe r e nt i n th e d o ct o r-p at ie n trel at i o n sh i p ; (2 ) th e b reach o f th atd u ty b y fai l i n g t o ex erci se th e r e q u is ite d e g r e e o f s k ill a n d c a r e ; a n d ( 3 ) th a t th is f a ilu r e b e th e p r o x im a te5

ca u se o f th e i nj ury s ust ai ned. ” Z w i re n v . T ho m pson , 57 8 S . E . 2d 86 2, 86 4 (G a. 2 0 0 3 ). G ener al l y, the det er m i nat i on of w hether the al l eged profess i on al negl i gence cau sed an i n

j u ry i s b eyo n d th e k en o f th e av erag e l ayp erso n , so th e p l ai n t i ff m u st
u s e e x p e r t te s tim o n y to e s ta b lis h p r o x im a te c a u s e . I d . a t 8 6 5 . V ie w in g th e r e c o r d in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r a b l e t o D u q u e a n d d r a w in g a ll i nfer ence s i n h i s f

avor, th e di stri ctcourtcorr ec t l y f ou nd thatthe U ni t ed S t at es c a nnotbe he l d l i a bl e f

ora ny ne gl i ge nc e a t tr i but a bl e t o the m ed i cal c ontr a c t or s w ho tr e a t e d hi m . I n r e s pons e t o the gove r nm e nt ’ s s um m a r y m ot i on m a t e r i a l s , D uque pr oduc e d no e vi de nc e sh ow i ng tha tthe gove r nm e ntc ontr ol l e d a nd s upe r vi s e d the tr e a t m e ntpr ovi de d by the co n tr a c t or s . A c c or di ngl y , the U ni t e d S t a t e s m a y be l i a bl e f or D uque ’ s i nj ur i e s onl y i f hi s i nj ur i e s w e r e pr oxi m a t e l y c a used thr ough
n e g lig e n c e b y th e U S P A tla n ta m e d ic a l s ta f f
. I n r e s p o n s e to th e g o v e r n m e n t’s s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t m a te r ia ls , D u q u e d id
n o t p r e s e n t e v i d e n c e to r a is e a g e n u in e is s u e o f m a te r ia l f

a c t a s to th e U S P A tla n ta
m edi ca l st af

f’ s negl i g ence . In fa ct , D uq ue prod uced no evi dence i nd i ca t i ng that the U S P A t l a nt a m ed i ca l s t a f f f a i l e d t o e xe r c i s e the r e qui s i t e c a r e i n tr e a t i ng a nd di a gnos i ng hi m . D uque r e l i e s on a r e por t pr oduc e d by a l e gal n u rse cons ul t a nt
w h o r e v i e w e d hi s m e di c a l r e c o r d s , b u te v e n th i s r e p o r ti n d i c a t e s th a tth e U SP A tla n ta m e d ic a l s ta f

f w a s n o t n e g lig e n t in h is tr e a tm e n t.6

T he r e f or e , upon thor ough r e vi e w of the r e c or d a nd c arefu l c ons i de r a t i on of the pa r t i e s ’ br i e f

s , w e di s c e r n no r e ve r s i bl e e r r ori n the di s tr i ct co u rt ’ s e ntr y of
su m m ary j u d g m en ti n fav o r o f th e U n i t ed S t at es o n D u q u e’ s cl ai m s. AF F I RME D.