Woods v. Young ( 1998 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-10565
Summary Calendar
RODNEY LEE WOODS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JOEL V. YOUNG; SHAFFER, Dr.; JOHN DOE,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Northern District of Texas
(1:95-CV-152-BA)
March 19, 1998
Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Rodney Lee Woods, Texas Prisoner # 627825, appeals from the
grant of summary judgment against him on his § 1983 action. Woods
claimed that prison officials were deliberately indifferent to his
serious medical needs and inflicted cruel and unusual punishment
upon him. He contended that his rights were violated when prison
officials assigned him to work in a field squad despite his back
condition, which he argues prison doctors misdiagnosed.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
The magistrate judge initially dismissed without prejudice
Woods’ claims against Young, a warden of Woods’ prison, because
Woods had failed to allege Young’s personal involvement, and we
affirmed that dismissal. In this appeal, Woods contends that the
magistrate erred in failing to reassess Woods’ claim against Young
in light of Woods’ amended complaint. Yet Woods does not set forth
to us the nature of Young’s personal involvement. Accordingly,
Woods has abandoned this claim on appeal. See Yohey v. Collins,
985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).
Woods also complains that the magistrate judge improperly
dismissed his official-capacity claims against Young on Eleventh
Amendment grounds. Yet it is well settled that Woods can not evade
a state’s Eleventh Amendment immunity by suing state employees in
their official capacity. See Green v. State Bar of Texas, 27 F.3d
1083, 1087 (5th Cir. 1994).
Finally, Woods contends that the magistrate judge erred in
granting summary judgment in favor of Dr. Shaffer on Woods’ claims
against Shaffer in his individual capacity. Yet Woods must allege
that Shaffer was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical
needs. See Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 297, 302-05 (1991). At
best, Woods has alleged a cause of action for negligence, which
does not by itself give rise to a § 1983 claim. See Varnado v.
Lynaugh, 920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir. 1991).
AFFIRMED.
2