Filed: Feb. 02, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: 08-2667-pr Blaylock v. Borden UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS F OR T HE S ECOND C IRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER R ULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT . C ITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER J ANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY F EDERAL R ULE OF A PPELLATE P ROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS C OURT ’ S L OCAL R ULE 32.1.1. W HEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS C OURT , A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE F EDERAL A PPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE ( WITH THE NO
Summary: 08-2667-pr Blaylock v. Borden UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS F OR T HE S ECOND C IRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER R ULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT . C ITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER J ANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY F EDERAL R ULE OF A PPELLATE P ROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS C OURT ’ S L OCAL R ULE 32.1.1. W HEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS C OURT , A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE F EDERAL A PPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE ( WITH THE NOT..
More
08-2667-pr
Blaylock v. Borden
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
F OR T HE S ECOND C IRCUIT
SUMMARY ORDER
R ULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT . C ITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER J ANUARY 1,
2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY F EDERAL R ULE OF A PPELLATE P ROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS C OURT ’ S L OCAL R ULE 32.1.1.
W HEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS C OURT , A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE F EDERAL A PPENDIX OR AN
ELECTRONIC DATABASE ( WITH THE NOTATION “ SUMMARY ORDER ”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON
ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL .
At a stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan
United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of
New York, on the 2 nd day of February, two thousand and ten.
Present: RICHARD C. WESLEY,
GERARD E. LYNCH,
Circuit Judges,
MARK R. KRAVITZ,
District Judge. *
________________________________________________
MICHAEL BLAYLOCK,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
- v. - (08-2667-pr)
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BARRY BORDEN,
SERGEANT JOHN SWANSON, DR. JOHN
SUPPLE, AND JANE DOE, of Fishkill
Correctional Facility, in their
individual and official capacities,
Defendants-Appellees. **
__________________________________________________
Appearing for Appellant: MICHAEL BLAYLOCK, pro se, Staten
Island, New York.
*
The Honorable Mark R. Kravitz, of the United States District Court
for the District of Connecticut, sitting by designation.
**
The Clerk of the Court is directed to amend the official caption as
set forth above.
1
Appearing for Appellee: RICHARD O. JACKSON, Assistant
Solicitor General, for Andrew M.
Cuomo, Attorney General of the
State of New York, New York, New
York.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York (Chin, J.).
1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED,
2 AND DECREED that the judgment of the United States District
3 Court for the Southern District of New York be AFFIRMED.
4 Plaintiff Michael Blaylock appeals from the April 16,
5 2008 judgment of the district court, granting defendants’
6 motion for summary judgment and dismissing his complaint
7 with prejudice. Plaintiff’s complaint alleged that
8 defendants violated his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment
9 rights by failing to prevent another inmate from assaulting
10 him, acting with deliberate indifference towards his medical
11 needs, and causing him to be wrongfully disciplined. He
12 also asserted a violation of New York State Correction Law §
13 137, arguing defendants failed to provide him with a safe
14 and secure environment. 1 We presume the parties’
1
The district court granted defendants’ motion to
dismiss plaintiff’s state law claim for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction. The district court also denied
plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend his complaint.
Plaintiff does not address these dispositions before this
Court, therefore they are deemed abandoned. See Pabon v.
Wright, 459 F.3d 241, 247 (2d Cir. 2006). Similarly,
2
1 familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural
2 history of the case, and the issues on appeal.
3 This Court reviews a grant of summary judgment de
4 novo. Anderson v. Recore, 446 F.3d 324, 328 (2d Cir. 2006).
5 We construe the evidence, as we must, in the light most
6 favorable to the non-moving party.
Id. On appeal,
7 plaintiff contends that summary judgment was improperly
8 granted to defendants because the district court
9 impermissibly resolved factual issues against him. We
10 disagree. The district court applied the appropriate
11 standard in granting summary judgment to defendants and
12 explicitly resolved all conflicts in the evidence in favor
13 of plaintiff.
14 As the district court noted, “not . . . every injury
15 suffered by one prisoner at the hands of another . . .
16 translates into constitutional liability for prison
17 officials . . . .” Farmer v. Brennan,
511 U.S. 825, 834
18 (1994). The district court properly determined that no
19 reasonable jury could find that plaintiff’s conditions of
20 confinement posed a substantial risk of serious harm or that
plaintiff does not appeal his due process claim arising from
the disciplinary hearing following his altercation with his
fellow inmate. This claim too is deemed abandoned on
appeal. See id.
3
1 defendants acted with deliberate indifference to that risk.
2 See
id.
3 The record supports the district court’s grant of
4 summary judgment to defendants on plaintiff’s claim that he
5 was denied proper medical care. Plaintiff’s claim regarding
6 the alleged deprivation of medical care fails, as a matter
7 of law. See Salahuddin v. Goord,
467 F.3d 263, 279-81 (2d
8 Cir. 2006).
9 The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s remaining arguments
10 and finds them to be without merit. Accordingly, for
11 substantially the reasons stated in the thorough and well
12 reasoned opinion of the lower court, the judgment of the
13 district court is hereby AFFIRMED.
14
15 For the Court
16 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk
17
18
19
4
