USCA11 Case: 24-14173 Document: 28-1 Date Filed: 07/15/2025 Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-14173 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

RAY COX, as the personal representative of the estate of James Hinson, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus JASON SMOAK, CATRINA BURKHALTER-MURRY, MINDY VAN ACKERN, EVELYN MCGEE, CONNIE HINSON, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees, USCA11 Case: 24-14173 Document: 28-1 Date Filed: 07/15/2025 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 24-14173

MARK CHOQUETTE,

Defendant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cv-00057-ECM-SMD ____________________

Before ROSENBAUM, LAGOA, and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: James Hinson died in jail custody from a perforated ulcer. His estate sued two medical professionals who treated him in the days leading up to his death, alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The District Court granted summary judgment to the defendants reasoning that they “were not ‘subjectively aware that [their] own conduct put [Hinson] at a substantial risk of serious harm,’ [and so] they did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.” Cox v. Smoak, No. 1:23-CV-57-ECM, 2024 WL 4876937, at *10 (M.D. Ala. Nov. 22, 2024) (quoting Wade v. McDade, 106 F.4th 1251, 1255 (11th Cir. 2024) (en banc)). USCA11 Case: 24-14173 Document: 28-1 Date Filed: 07/15/2025 Page: 3 of 3

24-14173 Opinion of the Court 3

After careful review, we agree with the District Court on all fronts and find no reversible error. 1 Consequently, we affirm the District Court’s judgment for the reasons set forth in its Memoran- dum Opinion and Order dated November 22, 2024. See Cox, 2024 WL 4876937 at *1–10. AFFIRMED.

1 We review de novo the District Court’s grant of summary judgment. See

Stewart v. Happy Herman’s Cheshire Bridge, Inc., 117 F.3d 1278, 1284 (11th Cir. 1997).