Willie James Killian v. Arnold Holt, J.W. Ross
This text of 166 F.3d 1156 (Willie James Killian v. Arnold Holt, J.W. Ross) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Plaintiff, an inmate at the Fountain Correctional Center, was injured when he was attacked by another inmate. He brought this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his Eighth Amendment *1157 rights. After reviewing the record, we conclude that plaintiff has failed to bring forth evidence from which reasonable jurors could find that defendant prison officials knew of and were deliberately indifferent to a substantial risk of serious harm to inmates, resulting in plaintiffs injuries. See Hale v. Tallapoosa County, 50 F.3d 1579, 1582 (11th Cir.1995). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s entry of summary judgment.
We further decide that the district court did not err in refusing to appoint counsel for defendant in his section 1983 action. The district courts have broad discretion in deciding whether to appoint counsel. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Dean v. Barber, 951 F.2d 1210, 1216 (11th Cir.1992). The district court did not abuse its discretion in this case.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
166 F.3d 1156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willie-james-killian-v-arnold-holt-jw-ross-ca11-1999.