Case: Vega v. Davis

1:12-cv-01144 | U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado

Filed Date: May 1, 2012

Closed Date: 2016

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 1, 2012, the family of a deceased prisoner formerly held at the United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum in Florence, Colorado ("ADX") filed a Bivens action in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado against agents of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The plaintiffs sought compensatory and punitive damages, alleging that the defendants' failure to treat the prisoner's serious mental illness violated his Eighth Amendment rights. Specifically, the plaintiffs all…

On May 1, 2012, the family of a deceased prisoner formerly held at the United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum in Florence, Colorado ("ADX") filed a Bivens action in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado against agents of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The plaintiffs sought compensatory and punitive damages, alleging that the defendants' failure to treat the prisoner's serious mental illness violated his Eighth Amendment rights. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant "exhibited persistent and deliberate indifference" to the prisoner's mental illness, which lead to the death of the prisoner in an incident determined to be a suicide.

A related class action case was filed on June 18, 2012. See PC-CO-0019.

The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on August 31, 2012, adding a second cause of action for deprivation of the plaintiff's First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant disregarded the family's right to the prompt return of the prisoner's body and his personal possessions following his death.

On April 23, 2013, the district court (Judge Richard P. Matsch) granted the defendant's motion to dismiss on the First Amendment claim and denied the motion to dismiss on all other claims.

On June 21, 2012, the defendant filed an appeal of the district court's order denying the motion to dismiss. On July 22, 2014, the U.S. Circuit Court for the Tenth Circuit reversed the district court's decision, finding a lack of factual support for the allegation that the named defendant could be held personally liable for any shortcomings in the treatment of the prisoner. The court (Chief Judge Mary Beck Briscoe) remanded the case with direction to grant the defendant's motion to dismiss. 572 Fed. App'x 611 (10th Cir. 2014). On remand, the district court (Judge Matsch) entered an order dismissing the case on November 13, 2014. No. 12-cv-1144-RPM, 2015 WL 9583378 (Col. 2015).

On December 11, 2014, the plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to Seek Relief from Judgment and Leave to Amend the Complaint. The plaintiff claimed that he could prove that Warden Davis knew Vega and knew of his mental condition through new evidence obtained in discovery in Cunningham, et al v. Federal Bureau of Prisons (PC-CO-0019). Judge Matsch granted the motion on April 23, 2015. The plaintiff filed a second amended complaint on July 15, 2015, alleging that, had Warden Davis performed his job duties and read Vega’s records, he would have been aware of the suicide risk. Instead, he failed to take any preventative action. The amended complaint included a count of deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, and a count of deprivation of right of familial association.

The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the claim of deprivation of the right of familial association on the grounds that the claim was already adjudicated by the 10th Circuit, and also filed a motion to dismiss the deliberate indifference claim on the basis that the complaint still failed to state an individual-capacity claim against the defendant.

On December 31, 2015, the judge granted the motion to dismiss, determining that the defendant was not accountable for the death under the doctrine of qualified immunity without direct knowledge or notice.

The plaintiff appealed the decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on January 21, 2016. The appellate court determined that, although the deliberate indifference claim was nudged closer to the line of plausibility than in his initial complaint, the plaintiff still failed the facial plausibility standard. As such, the 10th Circuit Court affirmed the district court’s grant of the motion to dismiss. 673 Fed App'x 885 (10th Cir. 2016). The case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Denise Heberle (6/19/2012)

Priyah Kaul (11/18/2014)

Justin Hill (11/13/2019)

Related Cases

Cunningham v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, District of Colorado (2012)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4195758/parties/vega-v-davis/


Judge(s)

Briscoe, Mary Beck (Kansas)

Holloway, William Judson Jr. (Oklahoma)

Matsch, Richard Paul (Colorado)

McHugh, Carolyn Baldwin (Utah)

Phillips, Gregory Alan (Colorado)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Aro, Edwin P. (Colorado)

Callahan, Veronica E. (New York)

Leiter, Maurice A. (California)

Morrow, Christopher Scott (District of Columbia)

Taylor, Robert Paul (California)

Judge(s)

Briscoe, Mary Beck (Kansas)

Holloway, William Judson Jr. (Oklahoma)

Matsch, Richard Paul (Colorado)

McHugh, Carolyn Baldwin (Utah)

Phillips, Gregory Alan (Colorado)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Aro, Edwin P. (Colorado)

Callahan, Veronica E. (New York)

Leiter, Maurice A. (California)

Morrow, Christopher Scott (District of Columbia)

Taylor, Robert Paul (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Padden, Amy L. (Colorado)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:12-cv-01144

Docket

March 16, 2017

March 16, 2017

Docket
1

1:12-cv-01144

Complaint and Jury Demand

May 1, 2012

May 1, 2012

Complaint
13

1:12-cv-01144

Amended Complaint and Jury Demand

Aug. 31, 2012

Aug. 31, 2012

Complaint
43

1:12-cv-01144

Order and Judgment

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

572 Fed.Appx. 611, 2014 WL 3585714

July 22, 2014

July 22, 2014

Order/Opinion
62

1:12-cv-01144

Second Amended Complaint and Jury Demand

July 15, 2015

July 15, 2015

Complaint

16-01028

Order and Judgment

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

673 Fed.Appx. 885

Dec. 28, 2016

Dec. 28, 2016

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4195758/vega-v-davis/

Last updated Aug. 9, 2022, 3:15 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT and Jury Demand against All Defendants (Filing fee $ 350, Receipt Number 1082-2819497), filed by Raymond Vega.(Aro, Edwin) (Entered: 05/01/2012)

May 1, 2012

May 1, 2012

PACER
2

Case assigned to Judge Richard P. Matsch and drawn to Magistrate Judge Micheal E. Hegarty. Text Only Entry (sphil, ) (Entered: 05/02/2012)

May 1, 2012

May 1, 2012

PACER
3

Magistrate Judge Consent Form issued. No summons issued. (sphil, ) (Entered: 05/02/2012)

May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

PACER
4

SUMMONS REQUEST as to Defendant, Blake R. Davis re 1 Complaint by Plaintiff Raymond Vega. (Aro, Edwin) (Entered: 06/15/2012)

June 15, 2012

June 15, 2012

PACER
5

NOTICE re 1 Complaint Civil Cover Sheet by Plaintiff Raymond Vega (Aro, Edwin) (Entered: 06/15/2012)

June 15, 2012

June 15, 2012

PACER
6

SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (jjhsl, ) (Entered: 06/15/2012)

June 15, 2012

June 15, 2012

PACER
7

NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Amy L. Padden on behalf of Blake R. Davis (Padden, Amy) (Entered: 08/14/2012)

Aug. 14, 2012

Aug. 14, 2012

PACER
8

STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Answer or Respond to the Complaint by Defendant Blake R. Davis. Blake R. Davis answer due 8/23/2012. (Padden, Amy) (Entered: 08/14/2012)

Aug. 14, 2012

Aug. 14, 2012

PACER
9

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond re 1 Complaint by Defendant Blake R. Davis. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(Padden, Amy) (Entered: 08/22/2012)

1 Proposed Order (PDF Only)

View on PACER

Aug. 22, 2012

Aug. 22, 2012

PACER
10

ORDER granting 9 Motion for Extension of Time for Blake Davis to Answer or Otherwise Respond to the Complaint. It is ordered that Defendant Davis may file his response to Plaintiff's complaint 20 days after service of Plaintiff's amended complaint by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 08/23/12.(jjhsl, ) (Entered: 08/23/2012)

Aug. 23, 2012

Aug. 23, 2012

PACER
11

Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Complaint by Plaintiff Raymond Vega. (Attachments: # 1 Amended Complaint, # 2 Exhibit A - Part 1 to Amended Complaint, # 3 Exhibit A - Part 2 to Amended Complaint, # 4 Exhibit A - Part 3 to Amended Complaint, # 5 Exhibit B - Part 1 to Amended Complaint, # 6 Exhibit B - Part 2 to Amended Complaint, # 7 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(Aro, Edwin) (Entered: 08/30/2012)

1 Amended Complaint

View on PACER

2 Exhibit A - Part 1 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

3 Exhibit A - Part 2 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

4 Exhibit A - Part 3 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

5 Exhibit B - Part 1 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

6 Exhibit B - Part 2 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

7 Proposed Order (PDF Only)

View on PACER

Aug. 30, 2012

Aug. 30, 2012

PACER
12

ORDER Granting 11 Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint re 1 and [11-1]: Amended Complaint attached to Plaintiff's motion is hereby accepted for filing, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 8/31/2012.(rpmcd) (Entered: 08/31/2012)

Aug. 31, 2012

Aug. 31, 2012

RECAP
13

AMENDED COMPLAINT And Jury Demand against Blake R. Davis, filed by Raymond Vega. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A Part 1 to Amended Complaint, # 2 Exhibit A - Part 2 to Amended Complaint, # 3 Exhibit A - Part 3 to Amended Complaint, # 4 Exhibit B - Part 1 to Amended Complaint, # 5 Exhibit B - Part 2 to Amended Complaint)(rpmcd) (Entered: 08/31/2012)

1 Exhibit A Part 1 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

2 Exhibit A - Part 2 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

3 Exhibit A - Part 3 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

4 Exhibit B - Part 1 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

5 Exhibit B - Part 2 to Amended Complaint

View on PACER

Aug. 31, 2012

Aug. 31, 2012

PACER
14

MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Defendant Blake R. Davis. (Padden, Amy) (Entered: 09/20/2012)

Sept. 20, 2012

Sept. 20, 2012

PACER
15

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Plaintiff Raymond Vega. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(Aro, Edwin) (Entered: 10/10/2012)

1 Proposed Order (PDF Only)

View on PACER

Oct. 10, 2012

Oct. 10, 2012

PACER
16

ORDER Granting 15 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response : Plaintiff shall respond to Defendant Davis's 14 Motion to Dismiss no later than October 22, 2012, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 10/12/2012.(rpmcd) (Entered: 10/12/2012)

Oct. 12, 2012

Oct. 12, 2012

PACER
17

RESPONSE to 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Plaintiff Raymond Vega. (Aro, Edwin) (Entered: 10/22/2012)

Oct. 22, 2012

Oct. 22, 2012

PACER
18

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Defendant Blake R. Davis. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(Padden, Amy) (Entered: 11/05/2012)

1 Proposed Order (PDF Only)

View on PACER

Nov. 5, 2012

Nov. 5, 2012

PACER
19

ORDER Granting Defendant's 18 Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply re 14, to and including November 14, 2012, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 11/6/2012.(rpmcd) (Entered: 11/06/2012)

Nov. 6, 2012

Nov. 6, 2012

PACER
20

REPLY to Response to 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Defendant Blake R. Davis. (Padden, Amy) (Entered: 11/14/2012)

Nov. 14, 2012

Nov. 14, 2012

PACER
21

Minute ORDER Setting Hearing on 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim for 4/23/2013 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom A, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 3/26/2013. (rpmcd) (Entered: 03/26/2013)

March 26, 2013

March 26, 2013

PACER
22

NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Christopher Scott Morrow on behalf of Raymond Vega (Morrow, Christopher) (Entered: 04/22/2013)

April 22, 2013

April 22, 2013

PACER
23

NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Maurice Abraham Leiter on behalf of Raymond Vega (Leiter, Maurice) (Entered: 04/22/2013)

April 22, 2013

April 22, 2013

PACER
24

Courtroom Minutes for Motion Hearing held on 4/23/2013 before Judge Richard P. Matsch. ORDERED: Motion to Dismiss by Defendant Davis, 14 in case 12-cv-01144-RPM, is granted with respect to the First Amendment Claim and denied in all other respects. Defendant shall file an answer in accordance with the rules. Conference set for 5/24/2013 AT 02:00 PM in Conference Room (requirement of Rule 16 not applicable). FTR: K. Terasaki. (rpmcd ) (Entered: 04/23/2013)

April 23, 2013

April 23, 2013

RECAP
25

Restricted Audio File - Level 3 regarding Motion Hearing 24 held on 04/23/2013 at 2:00pm before Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch. AUDIO FILE SIZE (16.0 MB) (ktera, ) (Entered: 04/24/2013)

April 23, 2013

April 23, 2013

PACER
26

NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Robert Paul Taylor on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Taylor, Robert) (Entered: 05/06/2013)

May 6, 2013

May 6, 2013

PACER
27

ANSWER to 13 Amended Complaint, by Blake R. Davis.(Padden, Amy) (Entered: 05/07/2013)

May 7, 2013

May 7, 2013

PACER
28

NOTICE of Plaintiff's Submission of Proposed Scheduling Order and Proposed First Set of Document Requests by Plaintiff Raymond Vega (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Aro, Edwin) (Entered: 05/22/2013)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

May 22, 2013

May 22, 2013

PACER
32

ORDER Granting 31 Motion for Leave: Plaintiffs in both of the above captioned actions are granted leave to take the deposition of JOHN J. POWERS (BOP Register No. 03220-028) at the United States Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri, beginning on June 25, 2013, and continuing thereafter until completed, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 6/17/2013.(rpmcd)

June 18, 2013

June 18, 2013

RECAP
40

ORDER Granting [Doc. 76 in 12-cv-01570-RPM] Motion for Leave to Depose Incarcerated Witness Richie Antonio Hill, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 7/22/2013 (12-cv-01144-RPM and 12-cv-01570-RPM).(rpmcd).

July 23, 2013

July 23, 2013

RECAP
45

ORDER OF DISMISSAL RE 43 / 44 : the "Count One", more properly identified as the First Cause of Action, in the Amended Complaint 13 is dismissed. And this Court having previously dismissed the Second Cause of Action in the Amended Complaint. Clerk shall enter final judgment dismissing this civil action, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 11/13/2014. (jsmit)

Nov. 13, 2014

Nov. 13, 2014

RECAP
46

VACATED FINAL JUDGMENT re: 45 Order, by Clerk on 11/13/2014. (jsmit)(Modified on 4/24/2015 Vacated pursuant to the 56 Order)(evana, ).

Nov. 13, 2014

Nov. 13, 2014

RECAP
49

ORDER granting 48 Blake Daviss Unopposed motion for a 10-day extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs 47 Motion for Relief from Judgment and for Leave to Amend Complaint up to and including January 15, 2015, to respond to the motion, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 12/29/2014.(evana, ) (Modified on 2/24/2015 corrected link to 48 Motion)(evana, ).

Dec. 29, 2014

Dec. 29, 2014

RECAP
54

MINUTE ENTRY for Motion Hearing proceedings held before Judge Richard P. Matsch on 4/16/2015. Granting 47 Motion for Leave. Plaintiff shall have to and including June 15, 2015 to file the amended complaint. FTR: Kathy Terasaki. (babia)

April 16, 2015

April 16, 2015

RECAP
56

ORDER Granting 47 Motion for Relief from Judgment and Leave to Amend Complaint. Final Judgment 46 entered on November 13, 2014, is vacated and the plaintiff has to and including June 15, 2015, within which to file a new amended complaint, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 4/23/2015. (ktera)

April 23, 2015

April 23, 2015

RECAP
79

ORDER that the defendants motion to dismiss is granted and the Clerk shall entered judgment dismissing this civil action with an award of costs, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 12/31/2015.(evana, )

Dec. 31, 2015

Dec. 31, 2015

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Colorado

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Solitary confinement

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 1, 2012

Closing Date: 2016

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Family of prisoner who committed suicide at supermax facility due to untreated mental illness.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens

Constitutional Clause(s):

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Due Process

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Conditions of confinement

Confinement/isolation

Disciplinary segregation

Failure to supervise

Habilitation (training/treatment)

Restraints : physical

Sanitation / living conditions

Solitary confinement/Supermax (conditions or process)

Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)

Suicide prevention

Discrimination-area:

Medical Exam / Inquiry

Discrimination-basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)

Disability:

Mental impairment

Mental Disability:

Autism

Depression

Mental Illness, Unspecified

Medical/Mental Health:

Mental health care, general

Self-injurious behaviors

Suicide prevention

Type of Facility:

Government-run