| The plaintiff inmate C brought an action against the CSC for damages based upon a claim of negligence on the part of correctional officials in relation to a series of events. While in custody at a medium security institution, C was stabbed by a fellow inmate. C was then transferred to another medium security institution, and then a year later he was transferred to a maximum-security penitentiary. There, C was threatened by fellow inmates, placed in administrative segregation and, two months later, into protective custody. C sought damages for pain and suffering relating to the stabbing, and the loss of liberty and dignity he suffered by being placed into protective custody. |
| Denault J. dismissed the action with costs. After reviewing extensively the evidence, Denault J. stated that in relation to the stabbing incident, the question was whether correctional officials knew or ought to have known that C might have a problem with an incompatible inmate, and whether, having that knowledge, they took the appropriate steps to protect him from a reasonably foreseeable risk of injury. In response, Denault J. found that correctional officers did not know and ought not to have known, on the facts of this case, that there was an incompatible inmate present in the institution prior to the stabbing. As such, a duty to protect C over and above the general duty of correctional officials to protect inmates was not engaged and there was no breach. With regard to the incidents occurring once C was at the maximum-security institution, Denault J. held that the evidence indicated that C did not suffer any injury as a direct result of being placed in the general population: he was threatened and immediately sought, and was provided, protection. Also, Denault J. could not see how the decision to place C in protective custody might be found negligent. Whether the inmate was forced into protective custody, which he alleges, or whether it was his own decision, as the CSC maintains, the decision clearly had regard to the reasonably foreseeable risk of injury he would face in the general population and met the correctional officials' obligation to ensure his safety. |
TOP