MOBILE, Ala. — A federal jury awarded a substantial sum of $400,000 to a man from Escambia County, Alabama, after he claimed a prison doctor neglected an injury that led to the partial amputation of his foot. The verdict was handed down this week, pointing to significant concerns about the treatment of incarcerated individuals.
Canyon Duff Moye, who was serving time for theft at Fountain Correctional Facility in Atmore from October 2019 through August 2022, alleged that the prison’s medical director exhibited grave indifference to his deteriorating condition. Moye, 28, from Uriah, initially suffered from peripheral neuropathy due to a car accident in 2015, which caused a lack of feeling in his left leg and foot. His condition was exacerbated under the prison’s care, culminating in a toe injury on his left foot that worsened over time.
The medical director, Dr. Manuel Pouparinas, was employed by a private company that provides healthcare services in the Alabama prison system. Despite Moye’s worsening condition, his legal team argued that Pouparinas’ inaction directly contributed to the necessity of a partial amputation performed at North Baldwin Infirmary in Bay Minette in 2020.
Representing Moye, attorney Tiffany Ray highlighted the broader implications of the jury’s decision. She underscored its significance not just for Moye but as a reminder that incarcerated persons retain their constitutional rights, including the right to adequate medical care. Ray expressed satisfaction with the outcome, emphasizing its importance for justice and inmate rights advocacy.
Counterarguments presented by Pouparinas’ defense claimed that the infection which led to Moye’s amputation had healed two months prior to his transfer from the Escambia County Jail to the Alabama state prison system, challenging the timeline of the alleged negligence.
This legal outcome sheds light on the ongoing issues within prison healthcare systems, particularly regarding the accountability of medical personnel contracted by private companies. Legal experts suggest that the case could prompt a reassessment of healthcare standards and practices in correctional facilities nationwide.
The decision, reached after careful deliberation by the jury, underscores the evolving landscape of inmate rights and the essential standards of care owed to them. As the case concludes, it serves as a precedent in the advocacy for the humane treatment of all individuals within the penal system, advocating for reforms that ensure every person receives the necessary medical attention. The ruling may influence future policies and encourage more rigorous oversight of healthcare services provided in prisons, ultimately addressing broader systemic issues that affect incarcerated populations.