Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

White v. Maga

United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division

March 6, 2017

JAMES LEE WHITE, Plaintiff,
v.
DR. DOMINC J. MAGA, Defendant.

          Matthew P. Brookman Magistrate Judge

          ENTRY DENYING DEFENDANT'S SECOND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DIRECTING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS

          LARRY J. McKINNEY, JUDGE

         For the reasons explained in this Entry, the defendant's motion for summary judgment [dkt. 84] is denied.

         I. Background

         The plaintiff in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action is James Lee White (“Mr. White”), an inmate who at all relevant times was confined at the Fayette County Jail (“the Jail”) as a pretrial detainee. The defendant is Dr. Dominic J. Maga (“Dr. Maga”). In his complaint, Mr. White alleges that Dr. Maga was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. He seeks compensatory damages.

         The defendant seeks resolution of the plaintiff's claims through summary judgment. The plaintiff has responded to the defendant's motion for summary judgment and the defendant has replied. The plaintiff has also filed a surreply. The motion is ripe for resolution.

         II. Summary Judgment Standard

         Summary judgment is appropriate when the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). A “material fact” is one that “might affect the outcome of the suit.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). To survive a motion for summary judgment, the non-moving party must set forth specific, admissible evidence showing that there is a material issue for trial. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). The Court views the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and draws all reasonable inferences in that party's favor. Darst v. Interstate Brands Corp., 512 F.3d 903, 907 (7th Cir. 2008). It cannot weigh evidence or make credibility determinations on summary judgment because those tasks are left to the fact-finder. O'Leary v. Accretive Health, Inc., 657 F.3d 625, 630 (7th Cir. 2011).

         A dispute about a material fact is genuine only “if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). If no reasonable jury could find for the non-moving party, then there is no “genuine” dispute. Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 380 (2007).

         III. Discussion

         A. Undisputed Facts

         On the basis of the pleadings and the portions of the expanded record that comply with the requirements of Rule 56(c)(1), construed in a manner most favorable to Mr. White, the non-movant, the following facts are undisputed for purposes of the motion for summary judgment:

         On June 16, 2004, Mr. White received a sleep study at St. Mary's Medical Center. Dkt. 103-1 (Declaration of James Lee White (“White Decl.”); Dkt. 103-2 (Plaintiff's “St. Mary's Medical Records”). As a result of the sleep study, Mr. White's physician, William R. Beam, M.D., prescribed Mr. White a CPAP machine to treat his sleep apnea. Dkt. 103-2, at pp. 3, 5. Mr. White used the CPAP machine every night from June 2004 until his incarceration at the Jail in October 2011. Dkt. 103-1, ¶¶ 2-3.

         On October 22, 2012, while confined in the Jail, Mr. White, by counsel, filed a Motion to Compel Medical Treatment. Dkt. 103-3 (Fayette County Circuit Court, Transcript of Evidence, November 16, 2012 Hearing (“Transcript”). On November 16, 2012, the Fayette Circuit Court held a hearing on Mr. White's motion. Id. During the hearing, Mr. White requested several medical treatments, including the use of a CPAP machine while incarcerated at the Jail. Id., at pp. 7-10. Mr. White and Dr. Maga both attended the hearing and testified.

Mr. White testified regarding his need for a CPAP machine as follows:
Mr. White: . . . and . . . my sleep machine.
Mr. McMillin: For sleep apnea?
Mr. White: Yes, I have a sleep machine for sleep apnea and the guys at the jail have told me that I stopped breathing during the night and they've been scared for me sometimes, and um, and this machine stops that.
Mr. McMillin: How did you come into having that machine?
Mr. White: I took a test at uh, St. Mary's Hospital in West Virginia in the sleep center and they put on these sensors on you and you sleep for three or four hours and then they put a sleep machine on you and you sleep for four hours and they compare them and they found out that I had to have this sleep machine where I could possibly die from sleep apnea.
Mr. McMillin: Did you then use that sleep apnea machine?
Mr. White: Yes, I've used it every night since then.
Mr. McMillin: Where is it now?
Mr. White: It's at my house.
Mr. McMillin: And you've been told by the jail officers it would be inappropriate for you to use ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.