CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT|
|AUSTIN CHRISTIAN GRIFFITH,
FRANKLIN COUNTY, KENTUCKY and HUSTON WELLS,
MICHAEL TURNER, FRED GOINS, DON STURGEON,
SCOTTY TRACY, MARTI BOOTH, LAMBERT MOORE, and
RICK ROGERS, in their individual capacities (19-5378
& 19-5439); SOUTHERN HEALTH PARTNERS, INC. and
RONALD WALDRIDGE, MD, JANE BARTRAM, APRN,
HEATHER SHERROW, RN, and SABINA TREVETTE,
LPN, in their individual capacities (19-5378 & 19-
5440); BRITTANY MUNDINE, RN, in her individual
capacity (19-5378 & 19-5438),
| Nos. 19-5378/5438/5439/5440|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Kentucky at Frankfort.
No. 3:16-cv-00077—Gregory F. Van Tatenhove, District Judge.
Argued: January 28, 2020
Decided and Filed: September 21, 2020
Before: MERRITT, CLAY, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.
JOHN K. BUSH, Circuit Judge. This case involves a tragic turn of events during Austin
Griffith’s pretrial detention at Franklin County Regional Jail (“FCRJ”). Griffith was arrested on
November 8, 2015 after a failed robbery attempt, and he suffered a series of seizures six days
into his detention. He was sent to a local hospital, where he suffered a third seizure, and was
then airlifted to University of Kentucky Hospital. He later recovered but continues to suffer
headaches and other negative symptoms in the wake of this medical event.
Griffith brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that he received unconstitutionally
inadequate medical care during his detention. His claims were against Franklin County, the
county judge executive, the jailer and members of the Franklin County Fiscal Court (collectively,
the “Franklin County Defendants”), as well as against Southern Health Partners, Inc. (“SHP”), a
private medical company that provides medical services at the jail, and certain medical staff of
SHP (collectively, the “SHP Defendants”). In addition to his constitutional claims, the complaint
alleged state-law claims.
The district court granted summary judgment to Defendants on the constitutional claims,
finding that Griffith failed to establish that Defendants acted with deliberate indifference to his
serious medical needs. The district court then declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over
the state-law claims. Griffith appeals the grant of summary judgment. For the reasons that
follow, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.