Summary Calendar KASCHANDRA S. GREER, individually as the daughter of/and… v. QUYAN TRAN, DR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, EDGAR CDAY, JR, Warden, UNIDENTIFIED…

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
February 24, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-30466
Summary Calendar
KASCHANDRA S. GREER, individually as the daughter of/and
representative of the estate of Donnie James, SARAH SCOTT,
IRMA CLAYTON, SANDRA BRITTON, ALTHEA TOLIVER, BOSIE JAMES,
RONNIE JAMES, JEWEL SCOTT, GLENN JAMES, GLENDA JONES, MOSES
JACKSON
Plaintiffs - Appellants
and
CHANTELL PAYNE
Appellant
v.
QUYAN TRAN, DR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, EDGAR C DAY, JR,
Warden, UNIDENTIFIED PARTIES, RICHARD L STALDER
Defendants - Appellees
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 3:02-CV-3145
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, and DAVIS and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kaschandra S. Greer, individually and as the daughter of/and
representative of the estate of Donnie James, appeals the
district court’s summary-judgment dismissal of her civil rights

-- 1 of 3 --

No. 04-30466
-2-
complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. James died while imprisoned at
Washington Correctional Institute (WCI) after falling into a
diabetic ketoacidotic coma.
Greer argues that the district court erred in determining
that Dr. Quyen Tran, a doctor at WCI, did not personally act with
deliberate indifference to James’s serious medical needs in
violation of James’s Eighth Amendment rights. However, Tran
tested for and ruled out diabetes mellitus shortly after James’s
arrival at WCI, and there is no indication in the record,
including Tran’s affidavit, that Tran knew either that James was
diabetic or that James experienced any symptoms before falling
into a diabetic ketoacidotic coma. Accordingly, the district
court did not err in granting summary judgment on this issue.
See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 847 (1994); Little v. Liquid
Air Corp., 37 F.3d 1069, 1075 (5th Cir. 1994)(en banc)
(unsubstantiated assertions are not sufficient to satisfy a
nonmovant’s summary judgment burden); Varnado v. Lynaugh, 920
F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir. 1991).
Greer also argues that the district court erred in
determining that Tran, former WCI warden Edgar Day, Jr., and
Louisiana Department of Corrections Secretary Richard Stadler, in
their supervisory capacities, did not violate James’s Eighth
Amendment rights by their deliberate indifference to James’s
serious medical needs by failing to train subordinate officers in
the appropriate manner to recognize and treat James’s condition.

-- 2 of 3 --

No. 04-30466
-3-
However, Greer does not indicate which officers, if any, were
inappropriately trained. Furthermore, nothing in the record
indicates that James in fact exhibited or complained of the
symptoms that normally precede a diabetic coma or that any
officers witnessed any of these symptoms. Because Greer has not
shown that the appellants’ training of officers had any causal
connection with the alleged constitutional violation, the
district court did not err in granting summary judgment on this
issue. See Thompson v. Upshur County, 245 F.3d 447, 459 (5th
Cir. 2001); Little, 37 F.3d at 1075; Thompkins v. Belt, 828 F.2d
298, 304 (5th Cir. 1987).
Greer further contends that a policy described on WCI
medical request forms unconstitutionally deters prisoners from
seeking treatment and demonstrates the defendants’ deliberate
indifference toward James and other prisoners. However, Greer
has not alleged any facts indicating that the policy in fact
deterred James from seeking medical attention. Furthermore,
prison medical records indicate that James regularly visited the
infirmary and that he had declared himself a medical emergency in
the past in spite of the policy. The district court did not err
in determining that there was no genuine issue of material fact
concerning this issue. See Little, 37 F.3d at 1075; Thompkins,
828 F.2d at 304.
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --