FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT D e c e m be r 29, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ 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. 05- 17112 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 04 -000 80 -C V -G M F -4 S T E V E D E N N I S R Y A N , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s O L A K U N L E A I N A , D r ., in h is in d iv id u a l c ap a c ity , R E G I N A D O Y L E , N u r s e , J O L E N E H E R C Z E G , M e d ic a l D ir e c to r , D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lle e s .

________________________ 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 M id d le D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( D e c e m b e r 29, 2006)2

B efo re A N D E R S O N , B A R K E T T an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: S t e ve D e nni s R y a n, aG e or gi ai nm a t e , appe a l s pr o s e s e ve r a l a dve r s e rul i ngs r e l a t e d t o the j udgm e nta ga i ns thi s c om pl a i ntof de l i be r a t e i ndi f

f e r e nc e t o as e r i ous m e d ic a l n e e d b y D r . O la ku n le A in a , R e g in aD o y le , a n d J o le n e H e r c z e g . W e a f f i rm. I . B AC KG RO UN D R y a n , a n in m a te a t P h illip s S ta te P r is o n , a lle g e s th a t h e w a s d ia g n o s e d w ith h i a t a l h e rn i aa n d g a s tr o e s o p h a g e a l r e f l u x d i s e a s e ( “ GE R D” ) i n F e b ru a ry1 9 9 9 . He a s s e rt s tha tD r . A i napr e s c r i be d hi m as pe c i a l di e tf orhi s c ondi t i ons i n J une 2003, w he n he w a s a n i nm a t e a tR ut l e dge S t a t e P r i s on. H e c ont e nds tha tthe pr i s on k itc h e n s to p p e d p r o v id in g h is s p e c ia l d ie t a r o u n d D e c e m b e r2 0 0 3 . H e a lle g e s th a t, w i thoutthe di e t , he ha s e xpe r i e nc e d s t om a c h a i l m e nt s , s uc h a s vom i t i ng a nd heartbu rn. R yan al so cont ends thathi s c on di t i on s i ncre as e hi s r i sk of es op hageal cancer , bu the adm i t s thathe has had no form al educat i on beyond the si xth g ra de. A ta bench tri al , D r. A i na adm i tt ed thathe pres cr i bed R yan a spec i al di etthat r e s tr ic te d f

o o d s w ith o n io n s a n d to m a to e s , b u t e x p la in e d th a t th e d ie t w a s o n ly a dvi c e t o the ki t c he n. D r . A i nat e s t i f i e d tha the di s c ont i nue d the di e tbe c aus e the ki t c he n t ol d hi m tha tno s uc h di e tof f i c i a l l ye xi s t e d. A c c or di ng t o D r . A i na , the3

di etw as no tnece ss ary t o con trol R yan’ s c on di t i on . R yan h ad been presc ri bed P ri l osec , ant ac i ds, and a w edge pi l l ow t o reduce hi s s ym pt om s. D r. A i na al so had a d v is e d R y a n to lo s e w e ig h t a n d a v o id s p ic yf o o d s . D r . A in aa d m itte d th a t G E R D is as e r io u s c o n d itio n if n o t tr e a te d , b u t it w o u l d n o td am ag e th e eso p h ag u s. A cco rd i n g t o D r. A i n a, G E R D d o es n o tcau se cancerand w ou l d n otre sul ti n d ea th i f untre at ed. D r. A i na cond uct ed an endo sc op i c e xam on R yan and foun d n o evi dence of any c ance r. B oth D oyl e and H er cz eg t es t i fi ed thatthey provi ded m edi ca l care as nu rs es atR ut l edge S t at e P ri son. D oyl e s aw R yan o n Jul y 13, 20 04 , and R yan h ad req u est ed a sp eci al d i et . D o yl e i n fo rm ed R yan th atsh e w o u l d d i scu ss th e req u est w i th D r. A i na. D oyl e a ss es se d R yan’ s c on di t i on as st abl e and w as aw ar e thatR yan w as bei ng tre at ed w i th P ri l osec , ant ac i ds, and a bed w edge. H er cz eg t es t i fi ed that s h e h a d n o au th o r ityto c o u n te rm a n d ad o c to ro rto in s tru c t th e p r is o n k itc h e n to prepare a s peci al di et . S he w as no taw ar e of any occa si on on w hi ch R yan h ad been deni ed m edi ca t i on , ant ac i ds, or a bed w edge. R y a n t e s t i f

i e d tha thi s s y m pt om s di d notde c r e a s e a f t e rt a ki ng P r i l os e c , but a d m itte d th a t h e h a d n e v e rb e e n d e n ie d a n yo f h is m e d ic a tio n s o rtr e a tm e n t w h ile a tR ut l e dge S t a t e P r i s on, i nc l udi ng m e di c a t i on f orothe rc ondi t i ons s uc h a s hi gh bl ood pr e s s ur e a nd s c hi z ophr e ni a . R y a n a dm i tt e d tha the boughtf r om the pr i s on4

s t or e s pi c y f

oods a nd othe rf

oods tha the a l l e ge s tr i gge rhi s G E R D s y m pt om s , but a lle g e d th a t h e tr a d e d th a t f o o d w ith o th e rin m a te s . In June 20 04 , R yan fi l ed a c om pl ai ntagai nstD r. A i na for r el i ef un der f e d e r a l la w . S e e 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 . R y a n m o v e d f o ra n e v id e n tia ryh e a r in g to de t e rm i ne hi s c om pe t e nc y , a nd am a gi s tr a t e j udge de ni e d the m ot i on. T he m a gi s tr a t e j udge f

ound tha tR y a n s how e d, bythe na tur e of hi s c om pl a i nt , the abi l i ty t o unde r s t a nd l e ga l pr oc e dur e s . R y a n a l s o m ove d t o a m e nd ors uppl e m e nt hi s c om pl a i ntunde rF e de r a l R ul e of C i vi l P r oc e dur e 15. T he m a gi s tr a t e j udge g r a n te d th e m o tio n , a n d R y a n a d d e d D o y le a n d H e r c z e g a s d e f e n d a n ts . In S ept em ber 200 4, the ac t i on w as as si gn ed t o the m agi stra t e j ud ge for f i nal di s pos i t i on, a f

t e rthe c ons e ntof

a l l pa rt i e s . R y a n the n f i l e d am ot i on f

or appoi ntm e ntof

c ouns e l , w hi c h the m a gi s tr a t e j udge de ni e d. I n O c t obe r2004, R y a n m o v e d f

o rate m p o r a ry r e s tr a in in g o r d e r , w h ic h th e m a g is tr a te ju d g e d e n ie d . In A pri l 20 05 , D r. A i na, D oyl e, and H er cz eg m ov ed for s um m ary j ud gm ent . R yan oppos e d the m ot i on a nd f i l e d hi s ow n m ot i on f

orpa rt i a l s um m a ryj udgm e nt . T he m agi stra t e j ud ge deni ed bo th m ot i on s f or sum m ary j ud gm entand setthe ca se for a be nc h tr i a l i n O c t obe r2005. I n S e pt e m be r2005, the m a gi s tr a t e j udge or de r e d tha tD oy l e ’ s de pos i t i on coul d b e vi deot aped t o p re se rve her t es t i m on y f or tri al , because D oyl e w as5

s uf f e r i ng f r om c onge s t i ve he a rtf

a i l ur e . T he m a gi s tr a t e j udge or de r e d tha tR y a n be m ade a vai l abl e by t el epho ne t o h ave the op po rtun i ty t o q uest i on D oyl e. R yan pa rt i c i pa t e d by t e l e phone a nd c onduc t e d ac r os s - e xa m i na t i on. D uri ng the bench tri al , R yan m ov ed for the appo i ntm entof an expert w itn e s s , w h ic h th e m a g is tr a te ju d g e d e n ie d a s u n tim e ly . A f te rth e b e n c h tr ia l, R yan fi l ed an obj ec t i on t o the use of D oyl e’ s deposi t i on du ri ng the tri al . R yan m ove d a ga i n f

orappoi ntm e ntof

c ouns e l , w hi c h the m a gi s tr a t e j udge de ni e d. In D ec em ber 200 5, the m agi stra t e j ud ge ent er ed j ud gm enti n favor of D r. A i na , D oy l e , a nd H e r c z e g. T he m a gi s tr a t e j udge s t a t e d onl ytha t“ [ t ] he i s s ue s ha ve b e e n tr ie d a n d h e a r d ” a n d f o u n d “[ t]h e e v id e n c e p r e s e n te d d u r in g th e tr ia l o f th is m a tt e rf a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h tha tthe D e f e nda nt s w e r e de l i be r a t e l yi ndi f f e r e ntt o the P l ai nt i ff’ s m edi ca l needs. ” T he m agi stra t e j ud ge m ade no further f i nd i ng s of f

ac t o rc o n c l u s i o n s o f

l a w. Ry a n ap p e a l e d . W e g r a n t e d Ry a n ’ s mo t i o n f o rl e a v e t o p r o c e e d i n f

o rma paup er i s. W e c on cl ud ed thatthe appeal i s notfr i vo l ou s and i nstruct ed the part i es t o add re ss i n thei r bri ef

s “ w hether r em and i s r equi re d i n o rderfor the di stri ctcourt to m a k e f

in d in g s o f

f a c t a n d c o n c lu s io n s o f

la w r e g a r d in g th e b e n c h tr ia l.” I I . DI S CUS S I ON R y a n appe a l s ( 1) the de ni a l of hi s m ot i ons f

orappoi ntm e ntof

c ouns e l ; ( 2)6

the f a i l ur e by the di s tr i c tc ourtt o c ons i de rac l a i m f orr e t a l i a t i on; ( 3) the us e of D oyl e’ s deposi t i on t es t i m on y a ttri al ; (4) the deni al of hi s m ot i on t o app oi ntan e xpe rtw i tne s s ; ( 5) the f a i l ur e by the m a gi s tr a t e j udge t o m a ke e xt e ns i ve f i ndi ngs o f f a c t a n d c o n c lu s io n s o f

la w ; a n d ( 6 ) th e ju d g m e n t o f th e m a g is tr a te ju d g e . W e di s c us s e a c h i s s ue i n turn. A . T he M agis tr ate J

udge D i d N

ot A bus e His D is c r e t i on byD e ny i ng R y a n ’s Mo tio n s fo rAp

p o in tm e n t o

f C o u n s e l.

“ [P ] ri soners ra i si ng ci vi l ri gh t s c l ai m s . . . have no absol ut e c on st i tut i on al r i g h tt o c o u n s e l , ” Ki l g o v . R i c k s , 9 8 3 F . 2 d 1 8 9 , 1 9 3 ( 1 1 th C i r . 1 9 9 3 ) , a n d we r e vi e w ade ni a l of

appoi ntm e ntof

c ouns e l f

orabus e of

di s c r e t i on, B a s s v. P e rr i n, 170 F . 3d 1312, 1319 ( 11th C i r . 1999) . “ T he ke yi s w he the rthe pr o s e l i t i ga nt needs help i n p re se nt i ng the es se nt i al m er i t s of hi s or herpo si t i on t o the court . ” K i l go , 98 3 F . 2d at19 3. T he m agi stra t e j ud ge di d n otabuse hi s di sc re t i on . B as ed on R yan’ s e vi dentun ders t andi ng of the re l evantl egal i ss ues and l egal procedure, th e m a g is tr a te ju d g e r e a s o n ab lyd e te rm in e dth a t R y a n d id n o t n e e d a s s is ta n c e in p r e s e n tin g h is c o m p la in t to th e c o u rt. B . T he M agis tr ate J

udge D i d N

ot A bus e His D is c r e t i on byR e f us i ng T o C ons i de ra C lai m of

R e tal i at i on. R y a n a s s e rts th a t th e m a g is tr a te ju d g e e rr e d b yr e f u s in g to c o n s id e rac la im of re t al i at i on advanced for the fi rs tt i m e i n R yan’ s m ot i on for part i al sum m ary7

j udgm e nt . T he m a gi s tr a t e j udge e xpl a i ne d tha tR y a n ha d f a i l e d t o s e e k pe rm i s s i on fr om the courtt o am end h i s c om pl ai ntt o i ncl ud e anew re t al i at i on cl ai m . S ee F ed. R . C i v. P . 15 . T he m agi stra t e j ud ge ef fe ct i vel y deni ed R yan l ea ve t o rai se a ne w c l a i m , a nd w e r e vi e w f orabus e of

di s c r e t i on the de ni a l of am ot i on f

orl e a ve t o a m e nd ac om pl a i nt . G r e e n L e a f N ur s e ryv. E . I . D uP ontD e N e m our s & C o. , 341 F .3 d 1 2 9 2 , 1 3 0 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . T he m agi stra t e j ud ge di d n otabuse hi s di sc re t i on . R yan h ad previ ou sl y f i l ed a m ot i on for l ea ve t o am end. R yan p l ai nl y und er st oo d the re qu i re m entthathe se ek perm i ss i on , and “ [f

] ai l ure t o p roperl y r equestl ea ve t o am end, w hen [R yan] had a de qua t e opportuni ty a nd t i m e t o do s o, pr e c l ude s [ hi s ] a r gum e nton appe a l tha tthe d is tr ic t c o u rt ab u s e d its d is c r e tio n .” L o n g v . S a tz , 1 8 1 F .3 d 1 2 7 5 , 1 2 7 9 - 8 0 ( 1 1 th C i r. 19 99 ). C . T he M agis tr ate J

udge D i d N

ot A bus e His D is c r e t i on byA l low i ng D o y le ’s D e p o s itio n T

o B e U s e d a t T r ia l. R ya n co n ten d s th at th e m ag istrate ju d g e e rr ed b y a ll o w in g D o yle’s de pos i t i on t o be us e d a ttr i a l , be c aus e R y a n di d notha ve c ouns e l pr e s e ntdur i ng the de pos i t i on. R y a n a l s o a s s e rt s tha tthe m a gi s tr a t e j udge e rr e d be c aus e the m a g is tr a te ju d g e w a s n o t p r e s e n t a t th e d e p o s itio n to ru le o n R y a n ’s o b je c tio n s . W e di sa gree . W e r evi ew evi dent i ary rul i ng s f or abuse of di sc re t i on and revers e w hen there8

i s s ubs t a nt i a l pr e

j udi c e . B r oc hu v. C i tyof R i vi e r aB e a c h, 304 F . 3d 1144, 1155 ( 11th C i r . 2002) . T he m a gi s tr a t e j udge di d notabus e hi s di s c r e t i on. T he m ag istrate ju d g e e n su re d th at R ya n w o u ldb e r ep re se n ted d u rin g D o yle’s d e p o s itio n b y o r d e r in g th a t R y a n b e m a d e a v a ilab le b yp h o n e . R y a n w a s a v a ilab le a n d c o n d u c te d ac r o s s - e x a m in a tio n , w h ic h h e w a s p e rm itte d to u s e d u r in g tr ia l. W e ha ve a l r e a dy de t e rm i ne d tha tthe m a gi s tr a t e j udge di d notabus e hi s di s c r e t i on b y d e n y in g R y a n ap p o in tm e n t o f c o u n s e l. A s to th e m a g is tr a te ju d g e ’s f a ilu r e to b e p r e s e n t to ru le o n R y a n ’s o b je c tio n s , th e r e w a s n o p r e ju d ic e , b e c au s e R y a n d id notm a ke a ny obj e c t i ons dur i ng the de pos i t i on. D . T he M agis tr ate J

udge D i d N

ot A bus e His D is c r e t i on byD e c l i ni ng T o Ap p o i n t a n E xp ert W i tn ess. R ul e 706( a ) of

the F e de r a l R ul e s of

E vi de nc e “ c onf

e r s on adi s tr i c tc ourtthe di s c r e t i ona ry pow e rt o appoi nta n e xpe rtw i tne s s on the c ourt ’ s ow n m ot i on oron the m ot i on of any party. ” F ug i ttv. Jones, 54 9 F . 2d 10 01 , 10 06 (5th C i r. 19 77 ); se e a ls o B a s s , 1 7 0 F .3 d a t 1 3 1 9 ( n o tin g th a t d e n ia l o f am o tio n f

o ra n e x p e rt w itn e s s is r e v ie w e d f

o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n ) . R y a n d id n o t m o v e f o ra n e x p e rt w itn e s s u n til ha l f w a y thr ough the be nc h tr i a l . T he m a gi s tr a t e j udge di d notabus e hi s di s c r e t i on because R yan’ s m ot i on w as un t i m el y and w ou l d h ave prej ud i ce d D r. A i na, D oyl e, a nd H e r c z e g.9

E . T h e Fa ilu r e b

yth e M a g is tr a te J

u d g e T o M a ke E x te n s iv e Fin d in gs o

f Fa c t and C onc lus i ons of

L aw D oe s N

ot R e qui r e R e m and. W e a sked the part i es t o add re ss i n thei r bri ef s “ w hether r em and i s r equi re d i n o rderfor the di stri ctcourtt o m ake f i nd i ng s of f

ac tand con cl usi on s of l aw re gardi ng the bench tri al . ” R yan con t ends thatre m and i s r equi re d, and D r. A i na, D oy l e , a nd H e r c z e g ha ve nota ddr e s s e d the i s s ue . A f t e rc a r e f ul r e vi e w , w e ha ve c onc l ude d tha tr e m a nd i s notr e qui r e d. A l th o u g h R u l e 5 2 (a) o f th e F ed eral R u l es o f C i v i l P ro ced u re req u i res a d is tr ic t c o u rt th a t c o n d u c te d ab e n c h tr ia l to “f in d th e f a c ts s p e c ia llya n d s ta te se para t el y i t s c on cl usi on s of l aw , ” F ed. R . C i v. P . 52 (a ), “ re vers al i s unn ec es saryi f a ful l un ders t andi ng of the qu es t i on pres ent ed m aybe had w i tho utthe ai d o f s uch fi nd i ng s. ” R othenb er g v . S ec . M gm t . C o. , Inc. , 73 6 F . 2d 14 70 , 14 72 (11th C i r. 19 84 ). “ W e c an and h ave deci ded app ea l s on the m er i t s w here the di stri ctcourt h as n o t ev en en tere d an y f in d in g s o n ea ch se p ar ate f ac tu al issu e s o lo n g as ‘a c om pl e t e unde r s t a ndi ng of the i s s ue s ’ i s pos s i bl e . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. $242, 484. 00, 389 F . 3d 1149, 1154 ( 11th C i r . 2004) ( quot i ng H a rr i s v. T hi gpe n, 941 F . 2d 1495, 1 5 0 4 n .1 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 1 ) ) . I n thi s appe a l , r e m a nd i s unne c e s s a ry . W e a r e abl e t o unde r s t a nd a nd r e s o lv e w h e th e rth e m a g is tr a te ju d g e c o rr e c tlye n te r e d ju d g m e n t a g a in s t R y a n . T h e m a g is tr a te ju d g e f

o u n d th a t “[ t]h e e v id e n c e p r e s e n te d d u r in g th e tr ia l o f th is10

m a tt e rf a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h tha tthe D e f e nda nt s w e r e de l i be r a t e l yi ndi f f e r e ntt o the P la in tif f’s m e d ic a l n e e d s .” A s w e e x p la in in th e n e x t s e c tio n , w e a r e ab le to

“ i nf e r [ ] . . . i m pl i e d f

a c tua l f i ndi ngs tha ta r e c ons i s t e ntw i th [ the ] j udgm e nt . ” I d. F. T h e Ju d gm en t W a s N o t E rro n eo u s. W e r e vi e w de novo a ny c onc l us i ons of l a w m a de a f

t e rabe nc h tr i a l a nd r e vi e w the f

i ndi ngs of

f a c tf orc l e a re rr or . W e xl e rv. A nde r s on, 452 F . 3d 1226, 12 30 (11th C i r. 20 06 ). T o est abl i sh thatD r. A i na, D oyl e, and H er cz eg w er e del i bera t el y i nd i ff

er entt o h i s s er i ou s m edi ca l needs, R yan h ad t o sho w (1) “ an o b j ect i v el y seri o u s m ed i cal n eed . . . th at , i f l eftu n att en d ed , p o ses a su b st an t i al ri sk of s e r i ous ha rm , ” a nd ( 2) the r e s pons e byD r . A i na , D oy l e , a nd H e r c z e g t o the s e r i ous m e di c a l ne e ds “ w a s poore nough t o c ons t i tut e a n unne c e s s a rya nd w a nt on i nf l i c t i on of pa i n, a nd notm e r e l y a c c i de nt a l i na de qua c y , ne gl i ge nc e i n di a gnos i s or tr e a tm e nt , ore ve n m e di c a l m a l pr a c t i c e a c t i onabl e unde rs t a t e l a w . ” T a y l orv. A da m s , 221 F . 3d 1254, 1258 ( 11th C i r . 2000) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a rks a nd ci t at i on s om i tt ed). A n i nm at e’ s m er e di sa gree m entw i th the course of m edi ca l tr e a tm e n t d o e s n o t a m o u n t to d e lib e r a te in d if f e r e n c e . S e e H a m m v . D e K a lb C ou nty, 77 4 F . 2d 15 67 , 15 75 (11th C i r. 19 85 ). T he di stri ctcourtdi d n otcl earl y e rrw hen i tfoun d that“ [t ] he evi dence pres ent ed du ri ng the tri al of thi s m att erfa i l ed t o est abl i sh thatthe D ef endant s w er e11

de l i be r a t e l y i ndi f

f e r e ntt o the P l a i nt i f

f’ s m e di c a l ne e ds . ” T he onl ye vi de nc e i n the r e c o r d th a t R y a n ’s c o n d itio n w a s “a n o b je c tiv e lys e r io u s m e d ic a l n e e d . . . th a t, if l e f tuna tt e nde d, pos e s as ubs t a nt i a l r i s k of s e r i ous ha rm , ” T a y l or , 221 F . 3d a t1258, w a s t e s t i m ony by R y a n, w ho a dm i tt e d tha the ha d no f orm a l e duc a t i on be y ond the s i xth gr a de . D r . A i nat e s t i f i e d tha tR y a n’ s c ondi t i on w oul d notda m a ge the e s o p h a g u s , w o u ld n o t c au s e c a n c e r , a n d w o u ld n o t r e s u lt in d e a th if u n tr e a te d . T he r e i s no e vi de nc e i n the r e c or d tha tthe r e s pons e byD r . A i na , D oy l e , a nd H e r c z e g t o R y a n’ s c ondi t i on w a s a ny thi ng buta tt e nt i ve , m uc h l e s s “ poore nough to c o n s titu te a n u n n e c e s s a ry a n d w a n to n in f lic tio n o f p a in .” I d . I I I . CONCL US I ON T h e ju d g m e n t a g a in s t R y a n is AF F I RME D.