Estate of Peola Wingfield, dec v. Richard E. Curtis, Jr. ( 2012 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1424
ESTATE OF PEOLA WINGFIELD, DECEASED, By and Through His
Administratrix, Edna K. Thompson,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
RICHARD E. CURTIS, JR., M.D., Individually; WILLIAM
RHOADES, Dr., PH.D., Individually and In His Official
Capacity as Psychologist and Employee of the Richmond City
Jail; JAMES O. WOMACK, Captain, Individually and In His
Official Capacity as an Employee of the Richmond City Jail;
DERRICK MCGEE, Individually and In His Official Capacity as
an Employee of the Richmond City Jail; UNKNOWN DEPUTIES
SHERIFFS; UNKNOWN NURSES; UNKNOWN PHYSICIAN'S ASSISTANTS;
OTHER UNKNOWN EMPLOYEES OF THE RICHMOND CITY JAIL,
Individually and In Their Official Capacities as Employees
of the Richmond City Jail,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
MICHELLE B. MITCHELL, Individually and in Her Official
Capacity as Sheriff of the City of Richmond; DR. CHANG,
M.D., Individually and In His Official Capacity as an
Employee of the Richmond City Jail; JACK FREUND, M.D.,
Individually and In His Official Capacity as Medical
Director for the Division of Medical Services for the Jail;
DR. ZELDA JOHNSON, M.D., Individually and in His Official
Capacity as an Employee of the Richmond City Jail; SGT.
CUSHIONBERRY, Individually and In His Official Capacity as
an Employee of the Richmond City Jail; SGT. WILKINS,
Individually and In His Official Capacity as an Employee of
the Richmond City Jail; HERBERT R. ANDERSON, Individually
and in His Official Capacity as an Employee of the Richmond
City Jail; NURSE SMITH, Individually and in His Official
Capacity as an Employee of the Richmond City Jail; NURSE
MILLS, Individually and in His Official Capacity as an
Employee of the Richmond City Jail; WARNER LIPSCOMB,
Individually and In His Official Capacity as an Employee of
the Richmond City Jail; JERON BROOKS, Individually and In
His Official Capacity as an Employee of the Richmond City
Jail,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief
District Judge. (3:06-cv-00247-JRS)
Submitted: March 30, 2012 Decided: July 20, 2012
Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
JeRoyd W. Greene, III, ROBINSON & GREENE, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellant. William D. Prince, IV, THOMPSONMCMULLAN, P.C.,
Richmond, Virginia; Brewster S. Rawls, Ramon Rodriguez, III,
RAWLS, MCNELIS & MITCHELL, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
This case arises out of the death of an inmate, Peola
Wingfield, in the Richmond City Jail (“Jail”). Wingfield’s
Estate (“the Estate”) filed an action in the district court
naming numerous Jail employees as defendants, raising claims
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006), as well as several state
law claims, including medical malpractice, breach of contract,
ordinary and gross negligence, and wrongful death.
After years of litigation, including a prior appeal to
this court resulting in a remand, the district court granted
summary judgment in favor of the Defendants. The Estate timely
appealed.
On appeal, the Estate raises nine issues: (1) whether
the district court erred in denying its motion to deem admitted
the allegations in the Revised Second Amended Complaint;
(2) whether the district court erred in excluding Dr.
Richardson’s expert testimony regarding Wingfield’s cause of
death; (3) whether the district court erred in denying
Wingfield’s estate’s motion for leave to supplement an expert
opinion report; (4) whether the district court erred in limiting
the testimony of Dr. Rouhier, Wingfield’s treating physician in
the emergency room at Retreat Hospital, to matters regarding his
treatment of Wingfield; (5) whether testimony of Wingfield’s
treating physician created a genuine issue of material fact
3
regarding the cause of Wingfield’s death rendering summary
judgment error; (6) whether the district court erred in
determining that the Estate failed to show certain elements
required to state a claim for the violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983(2006); (7) whether the district court erred in finding that
Dr. Rhoades did not act with deliberate indifference, was not
grossly negligent, or that his deliberate indifference did not
cause Wingfield’s death; (8) whether the district court erred in
finding that Captain Womack had no role in treating Wingfield
other than meeting with Wingfield’s family and denying them a
visit with Wingfield; and (9) whether the district court erred
in granting summary judgment to Nurse McGee on the § 1983 claim.
This court reviews the trial court’s discovery
decisions for abuse of discretion. Nader v. Blair, 549 F.3d
953, 958-59 (4th Cir. 2008). After thorough review of the
record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its
discretion in reaching its decision on the discovery-related
issues.
With regard to the remaining claims, we have reviewed
the extensive and well-reasoned opinion of the district court,
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Estate of Peola
Wingfield v. Curtis, No. 3:06-cv-00247-JRS (E.D. Va. Mar. 28,
2011).
4
We grant the motion to submit on briefs and dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
5