Jay Donald Witkowski v. Cindy McGillis-Hiner and Peter Molnar

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Montana granted summary judgment to Cindy McGillis-Hiner and Peter Molnar in a pro se detainee’s action alleging inadequate medical care in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The court held that claims against Molnar were either time-barred or unsupported by evidence of deliberate indifference, and that claims against Hiner were barred by the plaintiff’s failure to exhaust available administrative remedies under the PLRA. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and directed that the case be closed.

Holdings

1. Claims based on Witkowski's hernia, knee infection, forearm lump, and rectal bleeding were time-barred because they accrued more than three years before the action was filed.
2. Molnar was entitled to summary judgment because the undisputed record did not show deliberate indifference to Witkowski's serious medical needs.
3. Hiner was entitled to summary judgment because Witkowski failed to exhaust available administrative remedies before bringing his claims.
4. Witkowski was not entitled to summary judgment because the undisputed evidence did not establish defendants' liability for constitutionally inadequate medical care.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Witkowski's claims against Molnar based on his hernia, knee infection, forearm lump, and rectal bleeding were barred by Montana's three-year personal-injury limitations period.
2. Whether the undisputed evidence showed that Molnar was deliberately indifferent to Witkowski's serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
3. Whether Witkowski exhausted available administrative remedies before bringing his claims against Hiner under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
4. Whether Witkowski was entitled to summary judgment on his inadequate-medical-care claims.

Disposition

other