Carmichael-Bey v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois conducts preliminary screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A of Jeffrey Carmichael-Bey’s § 1983 complaint concerning a leg injury and alleged deficient medical care at Centralia Correctional Center. The court dismisses the claims involving the damaged gymnasium carpet, missed meal, several medical and correctional defendants, and requested injunctive relief, while allowing the deliberate-indifference medical-care claim to proceed against Nurse Stauffer, Dr. Myers, and Dr. Arora. The court also denies the plaintiff’s motion for recruitment of counsel.

Holdings

1. A damaged carpet in a prison gymnasium does not constitute an objectively 'sufficiently serious' hazard that reflects deliberate indifference required to impose liability under § 1983; poorly maintained surfaces in prisons do not pose a substantial risk of harm.
2. Plaintiff sufficiently stated an Eighth Amendment claim against Nurse Stauffer for deliberately indifferent medical treatment by improperly treating his injury, sending him back to his housing unit, instructing him to walk on his fractured leg, and failing to ensure meal delivery.
3. Count 2 dismissed as to Dr. Wagner because even assuming he delayed sending the x-ray report, there is nothing to suggest the delay was deliberate rather than negligent.
4. Count 2 dismissed as to Dr. Zhu and Dr. Watson because they are private citizens not acting under color of state law, there is no vicarious liability under § 1983, and there is no constitutional duty to report past errors in medical care.
5. Count 2 dismissed as to Wexford because Plaintiff failed to identify a policy or practice that caused the constitutional violation; he alleged employees failed to follow existing policy rather than that a policy caused the violation.
6. Missing a single evening meal does not impose the type of severe harm required to amount to cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
7. Count 5 dismissed because Plaintiff cannot receive injunctive relief based on a past violation, and his requested relief is not narrowly tailored to the surviving claims.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff stated an Eighth Amendment claim against Supervisor Morrison for deliberate indifference to unsafe prison conditions (damaged carpet) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
2. Whether Plaintiff stated Eighth Amendment claims against Nurse Stauffer, Dr. Wagner, Dr. Zhu, Dr. Watson, Dr. Myers, Dr. Arora, Nurse Hodge, and Wexford for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs
3. Whether Plaintiff stated Eighth Amendment claims against correctional officers for denying him a meal based on false information about his condition
4. Whether Plaintiff stated a claim for injunctive relief against Warden Wehking and Healthcare Unit Administrator Simpson

Disposition

other