Deleon Harland v. Lisa Schuerman, Erin Wenger, and Nurse Brenda

Harland · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin · April 1, 2026 · No. 25-CV-1622-JPS

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin grants Deleon Harland leave to proceed without prepaying the filing fee and screens his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The court allows Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference and Wisconsin negligence claims to proceed against Lisa Schuerman, Erin Wenger, and Nurse Brenda based on alleged delays in providing medication for high blood pressure. The order also addresses service, exhaustion-related motions, responsive pleadings, and collection of the remaining filing fee.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
Writing for the Court
J.P. Stadtmueller
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
Decision date
April 1, 2026
Docket number
25-CV-1622-JPS
Procedural posture
Plaintiff filed a pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as a prisoner and moved for leave to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. The district court granted the fee motion and screened the complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, allowing constitutional and state-law claims to proceed.
Standard of review
At PLRA screening, the court applies the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) standard, accepts well-pleaded factual allegations as true, and determines whether the complaint states a plausible claim for relief.
Precedential value
unpublished district court order
Parties
Deleon Harland v. Lisa Schuerman, Erin Wenger, Nurse Brenda
Disposition
other

Topics

section 1983prisoners rightscruel and unusual punishmentnegligencecivil procedure

Practice areas

prisoner civil rightsconstitutional tortsmedical negligencecivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged that Schuerman, Wenger, and Nurse Brenda were deliberately indifferent to Harland's serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
  2. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged a Wisconsin negligence claim against the defendants.
  3. Whether Harland should be allowed to proceed without prepaying the remainder of the filing fee under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.

Holdings

  1. The complaint sufficiently alleged an Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim against Schuerman, Wenger, and Nurse Brenda based on the alleged knowing failure to provide Harland's necessary blood-pressure medication.
  2. The complaint sufficiently alleged a Wisconsin negligence claim against Schuerman, Wenger, and Nurse Brenda, and the court exercised supplemental jurisdiction over that claim.
  3. Harland's motion for leave to proceed without prepaying the filing fee was granted, subject to payment of the remaining fee through deductions from his prison trust account.

Key quotations

A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows a court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. (Section 2.1)
The Court finds that Plaintiff may proceed against Schuerman, Wenger, and Brenda on an Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim for their indifference to Plaintiff’s serious medical needs. (Section 2.3)

Factual background

Harland, an inmate at Waupun Correctional Institution, had been diagnosed with high blood pressure and prescribed medication. He alleged that his medication expired on October 23, 2024, that he notified the defendants on October 25 that he was not receiving it, and that the defendants knowingly failed to renew or provide it. He further alleged that he became dizzy on October 29 and fractured his finger in a fall.

Procedural history

Harland filed a complaint alleging that prison personnel failed to provide prescribed high-blood-pressure medication, causing dizziness and a fractured finger. He paid the ordered initial partial filing fee. The district court granted leave to proceed without prepaying the remainder of the filing fee, found the complaint sufficient at the screening stage, authorized service, and directed defendants to raise exhaustion-related challenges by summary judgment.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…