Summary
In this initial review order, the court permits Marlon Lewis to proceed against Doctor Lee on individual-capacity claims concerning the alleged administration of Risperdal, including Fourteenth Amendment rights to refuse treatment and receive medical information, and an Eighth Amendment claim that the medication was prescribed to impose harm. The court dismisses all other claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), defers consideration of the medical-malpractice claim, and directs service-related steps.
Holdings
- Lewis plausibly alleged that Doctor Lee violated his Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process right to refuse treatment by prescribing Risperdal despite his attempted refusal, and the claim may proceed for further development of the record.
- Lewis plausibly alleged a Fourteenth Amendment due process claim that Doctor Lee failed to provide medical information necessary for Lewis to make an informed decision about Risperdal, and the claim may proceed.
- Lewis plausibly alleged an Eighth Amendment claim by asserting that Doctor Lee prescribed Risperdal for the purpose of imposing harm, and the claim may proceed for further development.
- All claims other than the three identified individual-capacity federal claims were dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), including the state-law medical-malpractice claim at the initial-review stage.
Questions Presented
- Whether Lewis plausibly alleged a Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim based on a right to refuse unwanted antipsychotic treatment.
- Whether Lewis plausibly alleged a Fourteenth Amendment liberty-interest claim based on a right to receive medical information necessary to make an informed decision about treatment.
- Whether Lewis plausibly alleged an Eighth Amendment violation by asserting that Doctor Lee prescribed Risperidone for the purpose of imposing harm.
- Whether Lewis's state-law medical-malpractice claim should be screened and allowed to proceed at the initial-review stage.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (18)
- Giraldo v. Kessler, 694 F.3d 161, 164 (2d Cir. 2012)(followed)
- Kelly v. New York State Unified Ct. Sys., No. 21-1633, 2022 WL 1210665, at *1 (2d Cir. Apr. 25, 2022)(followed)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)(followed)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)(followed)
- Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006)(followed)
- Tracy v. Freshwater, 623 F.3d 90, 101-02 (2d Cir. 2010)(followed)
- Wright v. Smith, 21 F.3d 496, 501 (2d Cir. 1994)(followed)
- Tangreti v. Bachman, 983 F.3d 609, 620 (2d Cir. 2020)(followed)
- Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 221-22, 227 (1990)(followed)
- Fonck v. Allen, No. 19-CV-1665, 2019 WL 5597739, at *5 (D. Conn. Oct. 30, 2019)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 18.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…