Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Grimes v. District of Columbia

United States District Court, District of Columbia

February 12, 2013

Patricia GRIMES, as the next best friend and Personal Representative of the Estate of Karl Grimes, Plaintiff,
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, and Prince George's Hospital Center, Defendants. District of Columbia, Cross Claimant,
v.
Prince George's Hospital Center, Cross Defendant. Prince George's Hospital Center, Counter Claimant,
v.
District of Columbia, Counter Defendant.

Page 197

Gregory L. Lattimer, Law Offices of Gregory L. Lattimer, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff.

David A. Jackson, District of Columbia Office of the Attorney General, Washington, DC, Gina Marie Smith, Joseph B. Chazen, Meyers, Rodbell & Rosenbaum, P.A., Riverdale Park, MD, for Cross Claimant.

David A. Jackson, Erica Taylor McKinley, Attorney General's Office for the District of Columbia, Washington, DC, Chantelle M. Custodio, Hodes, Pessin & Katz, PA, Towson, MD, Gina Marie Smith, Joseph B. Chazen, Meyers, Rodbell & Rosenbaum, P.A., Riverdale Park, MD, for Defendants.

Gina Marie Smith, Joseph B. Chazen, Meyers, Rodbell & Rosenbaum, P.A., Riverdale Park, MD, for Cross Defendant.

David A. Jackson, District of Columbia Office of the Attorney General, Washington, DC, for Counter Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION (Dkt. # 55)

RICHARD J. LEON District Judge.

Plaintiff Patricia Grimes (" Plaintiff" ) brings this action against defendant District of Columbia (" DC" ) for violation of the Eighth Amendment and negligent hiring, training, and supervision. Before the Court is defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment filed on September 13, 2010. [Dkt. # 55]. Upon consideration of the parties' pleadings, relevant law, and the entire record herein, the motion is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed a complaint on November 24, 2008, seeking to recover for her son's death. Complaint (" Compl." ) [Dkt. # 1]. Decedent Karl Grimes (" KG" ), as a juvenile offender in defendant's custody, was committed to the Oak Hill Detention Facility (" Oak Hill" ) on or about August 29, 2005. Compl. ¶¶ 10, 17. Plaintiff alleges that, on or about November 23, 2005, KG was attacked by several Oak Hill residents, resulting in his death. Id. at ¶¶ 11, 15. According to plaintiff, the attack occurred because " the facility was under-staffed and/or improperly-staffed to accomplish the detention of young males in a reasonably safe environment." Id. at ¶ 12. Plaintiff contends that defendant violated KG's Eighth Amendment rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Compl. Count I ¶ 21. Plaintiff additionally contends that defendant was negligent in hiring, training, and supervising Oak Hill personnel. Compl. Count II.

On November 6, 2009, the Court issued a scheduling order requiring plaintiff to designate expert witnesses by January 18, 2010 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4). [Dkt. # 34]. Thereafter, the Court extended the deadline for plaintiff to file a Rule 26(b)(4) Statement to March 20, 2010. Minute Order, June 21, 2010 [Dkt. # 40]. During the extended period, plaintiff failed to identify any expert witnesses and failed to ask for additional time to do so.

On September 13, 2010, the District of Columbia filed a motion for summary judgment.

Page 198

Def.'s Mot. Summ. J. [Dkt. # 55]. Plaintiff never filed a response. Instead, plaintiff filed on December 1, 2010, a motion to strike defendant's motion for summary judgment and disqualify the Office of the Attorney General from representing defendant. [Dkt. # 57]. On December 10, 2010, defendant filed a motion ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.