From our private database of 35,800+ case briefs...
Clifton v. Eubank
United States District Court for the District of Colorado
418 F. Supp. 2d 1243 (2006)
Pamela Clifton (plaintiff) was incarcerated during her pregnancy. Clifton had an appointment with the doctor at the correction facility at the eight-month mark of her pregnancy. The doctor informed Clifton that her pregnancy was proceeding as expected. Clifton began to experience contractions four days later, in the morning of December 25, 1998. Clifton told Officer Dawn Anaya (defendant) that she was going into labor. Anaya sent Clifton back to her unit without taking any further actions or providing Clifton with any medical assistance. At lunchtime, Clifton informed Officer Ira Wilks (defendant) that she was going into labor. Wilks also sent Clifton away and provided no assistance. Clifton then told a third officer that she was in labor and needed medical assistance. The third officer sent Clifton to the medical unit to see Nurse Ilona Eubanks (defendant). Eubanks performed an exam and informed Clifton that the labor was a false alarm because her water had not broken. Clifton asked Eubanks to transport her to the hospital because she had had other pregnancies that required medical assistance prior to the water breaking. Eubanks denied the request and sent Clifton back to her unit, failing to evaluate the fetus using a heart monitor. Clifton remained in distress and was not sent back to the medical unit until the following day. Clifton was transported from the medical unit to the hospital after reporting that she could not feel any fetal movement. Hospital personnel determined that the fetus was dead, and Clifton gave birth to a stillborn. In response, Clifton filed suit against Anaya, Wilks, and Eubanks on the ground that the improper medical care she received violated her constitutional rights. Anaya, Wilks, and Eubanks filed a motion for summary judgment on the ground that the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) barred Clifton’s claim.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Kane, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 620,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 620,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.