A federal court in Indiana has granted summary judgment to prison officials accused of being deliberately indifferent to the risk of fire at the Indiana State Prison, relying in significant part on the prison’s operation of a trained and equipped inmate fire department and its broader fire prevention and response program.

The ruling arose out of a January 14, 2023 fire in the prison’s A Cellhouse. Inmate Kory White sued a number of prison officials and employees, claiming they violated the Eighth Amendment by failing to protect him from the risk of fire and by failing to provide adequate medical care after he was exposed to smoke.

The facts were explained by the court as follows (note that ACH refers to A Cellhouse, and the fire started in Cell A252):

• At around 10:58 a.m., prison staff heard the fire alarm in ACH go off and inmates yelling, prompting them to respond.
• Sgt. Walton called a 10-71, which is the signal for a fire in ACH.
• Officer Cross grabbed a fire extinguisher from the officer’s station, and he and Officer Crockett went to the 200 North range with the fire extinguisher and the keys to the range.
• Once they were on the 200 range, they realized the location and size of the fire. 
• They proceeded to Cell A252, but it was hard to get near the front of the cell to manually unlock the door because of the intensity of the fire. Officer Cross used the fire extinguisher but it was not able to put out the fire.
• Officer Cross had unknowingly grabbed a water-based fire extinguisher, and realized he needed an ABC fire extinguisher instead.
• Officer Cross then quickly went back downstairs and met Lt. Smith-Robinson, who handed him an ABC fire extinguisher.
• At approximately 10:59 a.m., Officer Cross returned to Cell A252 with the ABC fire extinguisher and passed it to Officer Crockett, who deployed it to control the fire.
• First responders arrived on the scene, including Lt. Koen.
• Lt. Koen was able to open the door to Cell A252 as staff continued to try to put out the fire.
• The inmate firefighters arrived on the scene and were able to extinguish the fire.
• While the fire was ongoing, White [who was in Cell A214] testified that he was having difficulty breathing due  to the smoke in the cellhouse, and he assumed he “blacked out” because he was on his bed and later woke up on the floor. He did not know how long he may have been unconscious. 
• He says his eyes were burning, he felt dizzy, he wanted to vomit, and he experienced shortness of breath, severe coughing, and a headache.
• Once the inmate firefighters arrived and began extinguishing the fire, Captain McCann authorized the evacuation of the remaining inmates in ACH.
• Correctional officers unlocked the cells and swept each range. White’s cell was opened, and he was able to go down the stairs to evacuate.
• Once he exited ACH through the front door, he stated “I need some help” and asserted he needed to go to medical because he could not breathe. 
• He directed this statement to everyone standing outside of ACH, which he believed included Case Worker Mayes, Lt. Koen, Sgt. Walton, and Lt. Smith-Robinson. 
• Officers Crockett and Cross were nearby getting water, and White did not know whether they heard him.
• White and the other inmates were escorted to the recreation building, while any inmate experiencing a medical emergency was taken directly to the medical services unit.
• White testified he conveyed his need for medical attention during the escort and reiterated his request once they arrived at the recreation building.
• He believed he requested medical attention from Sgt. Walton, who responded that she was doing a count. Id. He does not recall having any further conversations with the incident defendants while in the recreation building.
• After ACH was cleared, the inmates were returned to their cells and placed on lockdown.
• Lt. Koen and Lt. Smith-Robinson assisted in directing inmates back to their cells. White ran into Lt. Koen outside the cellhouse and asked whether they were going to get medical attention.
• Lt. Koen responded, “Later. Now lock in.” Id. Lt. Koen attests that inmates who requested medical attention but did not appear to be experiencing an emergency were returned to their cells so staff could perform a triage and coordinate treatment with medical staff.

White claimed smoke from the fire caused him difficulty breathing, burning eyes, dizziness, nausea, severe coughing and a headache. He also believed he may have lost consciousness. Captain McCann authorized the evacuation of the remaining inmates from the cellhouse.

White subsequently sued several correctional officers, alleging they were deliberately indifferent to his requests for medical treatment. He also sued prison leadership, claiming they knew conditions in the cellhouse created a substantial risk of serious harm in the event of a fire and that their deliberate indifference led to a failure to take appropriate measures to address that risk.

Central to the court’s consideration of that claim was the prison’s own fire department.

Indiana State Prison maintains an on-site inmate fire department. Its inmate firefighters receive statewide firefighter certification and training through the State Fire Marshal. According to the evidence submitted by prison officials, maintaining the department allows the prison to respond to fires more quickly than if it were required to await the arrival of an outside fire department.

The prison had implemented other fire protection measures as well. Following a 2017 fire, it purchased additional water and ABC extinguishers, reduced the amount of property inmates could keep in their cells, replaced plastic property boxes with more fire-resistant steel boxes, and upgraded its fire hydrants.

The inmate fire department conducted bimonthly inspections of fire extinguishers. The Safety Hazard Manager and fire department conducted four fire drills per year for each building. The prison also maintained a written Fire Plan addressing fire prevention and evacuation, and staff received training and were tested on their knowledge of the plan.

White challenged the adequacy of those measures. Among other things, he alleged problems with fire extinguishers, smoke alarms, ventilation systems, electrical systems, staff training and fire drills. He contended inmate firefighters were not housed in the cellhouse, that they were not released quickly enough to respond to fires, that there was no automatic fire-suppression system, and that staff had failed to comply with recommendations made following the 2017 fire.

The court found that most of White’s allegations lacked evidentiary support. More importantly, Judge Philip P. Simon explained that prison officials violate the Eighth Amendment when they know of a substantial risk of serious harm to inmates and are deliberately indifferent to that risk. Officials who take reasonable measures to address a known risk are not deliberately indifferent merely because additional precautions could have been taken or the measures ultimately failed to prevent harm.

The court pointed to the fact that the prison had established an on-site fire department whose members received statewide firefighter certification; maintained and repaired alarms, dampers, exhaust systems and extinguishers; purchased updated firefighting and smoke-control equipment; added ABC and water extinguishers; upgraded hydrants; conducted extinguisher inspections and fire drills; maintained a Fire Plan; and trained and tested staff on fire procedures – as weighing against a finding of deliberate indifference.

Judge Simon concluded:

• The undisputed evidence instead shows a substantial system of fire prevention, firefighting, evacuation, inspection, and training measures directed at the very risk White contends the defendants ignored.

The court held that the Eighth Amendment did not require prison officials to eliminate every conceivable fire hazard or implement every additional precaution that might further reduce the risk. The fact that the measures in place did not prevent White from being exposed to smoke did not permit a reasonable jury to conclude that prison officials demonstrated “a total unconcern” for his safety.

The court also rejected White’s claims against the correctional personnel involved in the evacuation and his claim against prison psychologist over his requests for medical attention following the fire. On September 23, 2026, Judge Simon granted summary judgment to all of the defendants and directed that judgment be entered against White.