Aduddle v. Fort Bend County, et al, No. 06-20913 (5th Cir. 2007)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 06-20913 Summary Calendar December 11, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk JAMES HENRY ADUDDLE Plaintiff-Appellant v. FORT BEND COUNTY, A Political Subdivision of the State of Texas; SHERIFF MILTON WRIGHT Defendants-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CV-2867 Before JOLLY, DENNIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* James Henry Aduddle appeals the district court s dismissal on summary judgment of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights suit and its subsequent denial of his motion for relief from judgment. Because Aduddle neither alleges nor shows that the alleged violation of his constitutional right to adequate medical treatment arose from the enforcement of an official policy or custom, the district court did not err in dismissing his claims against Fort Bend County and Sheriff * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 06-20913 Wright in his official capacity. See McKinney v. Irving Indep. Sch. Dist., 309 F.3d 308, 312 (5th Cir. 2002); Woodward v. Andrus, 419 F. 3d 348, 352 (5th Cir. 2005). Aduddle s claim against Sheriff Wright in his individual capacity fails because he offers nothing more than unfounded assertions to establish that Sheriff Wright s actions resulted in the alleged denial of medical treatment. See Alton v. Texas A&M Univ., 168 F.3d 196, 200 (5th Cir. 1999). Dismissal is also warranted because Aduddle fails to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. See Hare v. City of Corinth, Miss., 74 F.3d 633, 643 (5th Cir. 1996). AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.