Wine V. Black Et Al

On July 03, 2024, the Connecticut jury returned a verdict in favor of the Correctional Institution officers. No violation of the Plaintiff prisoner’s constitutional rights was found.

Case Background

On April 24, 2018, Plaintiff Daniel White, a sentenced inmate, filed a civil rights action before the United States District Court, in Connecticut. Judge Victor A. Bolden presided over this case. [Case number: 3:18cv704]

Cause

The Plaintiff, Daniel Wine, was an inmate at MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution. In the weeks leading up to June 10, 2015, Robert Krawczynski, along with other known members of the Arion ARYAN Brotherhood Prison Gang, made direct and explicit threats of harm against him. These threats made it clear that serious bodily injury was imminent for Wine. High-ranking prison officials, including Lieutenant Drolet, Lieutenant Diaz, and Captain Black, were aware of these threats.

On June 4, 2015, Correctional Officer Pennel sent Wine to speak with Lieutenant Drolet and Lieutenant Diaz about these credible threats. Wine reported his concerns and pleaded with Lieutenant Drolet to take protective measures. However, Lieutenant Drolet refused to help. Knowing that an attack from the gang members was likely, Wine asked Captain Black for advice on what to do. Captain Black simply advised, “Try to duck.” Wine followed this advice and returned to his housing unit.

A few days later, on June 10, 2015, Krawczynski violently attacked Wine. The failure of Lieutenant Drolet, Captain Black, and other officials to intervene and protect Wine from this attack demonstrated a deliberate disregard for his constitutional rights. After the assault, the Defendants acted to cover up their misconduct. They and other staff members prevented Wine from reporting the attack and pressing criminal charges against Krawczynski.

Injury

The attack left the Plaintiff completely unconscious, covered in blood, and unresponsive. He was hospitalized and endured severe injuries, including a broken jaw and a stab wound in his upper lip, as identified by the surgeon. Due to these injuries, the Plaintiff required a lengthy surgical procedure and faced a prolonged hospital stay.

Damages

The Plaintiff sought compensatory damages that were fair and reasonable. Additionally, he requested special damages to cover all medical, hospital, and physician expenses. He also pursued punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and all costs related to the litigation.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Daniel Wine
    • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Patrick J. Filan
  • Defendant(s): Christopher Drolet | Ivette Diaz | Ronald Black
    • Counsel for Defendant(s): Janelle Medeiros | Madeline A. Melchionne | Robin S. Schwartz | Samantha C. Wong | Terrence M. O’Neill

Claims

The Plaintiff argued that the Defendants’ failure to protect him from imminent bodily harm by inmates violated his Eighth Amendment rights. He claimed that Defendants Semple and Champdelaine did not properly train or supervise Black, Drolet, and Diaz, which also breached his rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Additionally, the Defendants’ refusal to allow or help him report the assault violated his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

Defense

The Defendants in their answer denied allegations of violation of the the Plaintiff’s constitutional rights.  On July 21, 2020, Defendants Chapdelaine and Semple were terminated from the case after an Initial Review Order was issued. The remaining Defendants asserted affirmative defenses and claimed that Plaintiff experienced harm or injury due to his own actions, not because of the conduct of any Defendant.

Jury Verdict

On July 03, 2024, the Connecticut jury returned a defense verdict. The jury found that Plaintiff Daniel White had failed to prove that Defendants Christopher Drolet, Ivette Diaz, and Ronald Black violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights through their acts and omissions.

On July 29, 2024, Judge Victor A. Bolden entered a judgment on the verdict consistent with the jury verdict and dismissed the case.

Court Documents:

Available upon request