ILNews

Man loses appeal of suit against sheriff, jail medical staff

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A man who was held in Delaware County jail for nine days before he was released because no charges were filed sued the county sheriff and jail medical staff alleging indifference to his serious medical condition. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

Shane Holloway, who has Klippel-Trenaunay Syndrome, which causes chronic body pain, was arrested Sept. 29, 2009, on suspicion of dealing drugs. A master commissioner informed Holloway of the probable cause determination and ordered that Holloway be released by 9 a.m. Oct. 7 if the prosecutor didn’t file formal charges. During his time in jail, the medical staff did not give him Oxycontin, which he took to manage pain, but instead prescribed Tylenol and ibuprofen.

Holloway was released on Oct. 7 after charges weren’t filed. He filed his lawsuit against the county sheriff, Dr. Nadir Al-Shami and two nurses claiming they were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. While in jail, he only mentioned he was in pain once to the medical staff, although he later said he was in pain the entire time but kept quiet.

The District Court granted the defendants’ motions for summary judgment, finding Holloway did not show that an unconstitutional policy or custom resulted in a constitutional deprivation. Also, Holloway didn’t produce evidence to support an inference that the doctor or nurses were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs.

In Shane A. Holloway v. Delaware County Sheriff, in his official capacity, et al., 12-2592, the 7th Circuit found the length of Holloway’s detention did not violate the 14th Amendment and agreed that the sheriff didn’t act pursuant to an unconstitutional policy or custom. With regard to the medical staff, Holloway didn’t show any evidence that Al-Shami intended to cause Holloway pain or knew that the drugs he prescribed would be insufficient to alleviate Holloway’s symptoms. The judges also pointed out that the nurses could not prescribe medication on their own and didn’t act with deliberate indifference in following the doctor’s orders.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

ADVERTISEMENT