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.

Hayes v. Corizon Health Services

United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Terre Haute Division

May 11, 2018

QUINTERO LAWRENCE HAYES, Plaintiff,
v.
CORIZON HEALTH SERVICES in their official capacity, SAMUEL BYRD Dr., in his individual and official capacity as the doctor at the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility, KIM HOBSON in her individual and official capacity as the supervising nurse of operations at the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility, DEA ANN GILLFILLAN in her individual and official capacity as a nurse at the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility, KELLY J. KAISER in her individual and official capacity as a Nurse at the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility, DONNA LOCKHART in her individual and official capacity as a nurse at Wabash Valley Correctional Facility, Defendants.

          ENTRY ON PENDING MOTIONS

          Hon. William T. Lawrence, Judge United States District Court

         This matter is before the Court for resolution of several motions recently filed by Plaintiff Quintero Lawrence Hayes.

         I. Motion to Amend Complaint

         Mr. Hayes's motion for leave to file an amended complaint, Dkt. No. 48, is granted. The clerk is directed to file the tendered pleading, Dkt. No. 48-1, as the amended complaint. This litigation shall proceed with the amended complaint as the operative pleading in the action.

         II. Screening of Amended Complaint

         Because Mr. Hayes is a prisoner, his amended complaint is subject to the screening requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), the Court must dismiss the amended complaint if it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. In determining whether the amended complaint states a claim, the Court applies the same standard as when addressing a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). See Lagerstrom v. Kingston, 463 F.3d 621, 624 (7th Cir. 2006). To survive dismissal,

[the] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face. A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Pro se complaints such as that filed by Mr. Hayes are construed liberally and held to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. Obriecht v. Raemisch, 517 F.3d 489, 491 n.2 (7th Cir. 2008).

         The amended complaint is substantially similar to the original complaint, which alleges that medical assistance was delayed or refused for three days while Mr. Hayes experienced serious medical conditions, including acute kidney failure. A thorough discussion of Mr. Hayes's claims can be found in the Court's entry screening the original complaint, Dkt. No. 10, and need not be reproduced here, as the amended complaint primarily adds factual allegations to support the claims pled in the original complaint.

         However, the amended complaint adds Nurse Tara Powers as a defendant. The amended complaint alleges that, before Mr. Hayes began to experience more advanced symptoms of his serious medical conditions, Nurse Powers collected a urine sample for testing, learned of abnormalities in the test results, and failed to alert Mr. Hayes or take other appropriate action. The amended complaint asserts plausible claims against Nurse Powers for exhibiting deliberate indifference to a serious medical need in violation of Mr. Hayes's Eighth Amendment rights and for medical malpractice and intentional infliction of emotional distress under Indiana law. These claims shall proceed as submitted.

         The viable claims acknowledged in the Court's screening of the original complaint shall continue to proceed as submitted. These include deliberate indifference, medical malpractice, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims against Dr. Samuel Byrd and Nurses Dea Ann Gilfillan, Kelly Kaiser, and Donna Lockhart; a failure-to-train claim against supervising nurse Kim Hobson; and a practice-or-policy claim against Corizon Health Services.

         This summary of claims includes all of the viable claims identified by the Court. All other claims have been dismissed. If Mr. Hayes believes that additional claims were alleged in the amended complaint, but not identified by the Court he shall have through June 15, 2018, in which to identify those claims.

         III. Service of Process and Further Proceedings

         The clerk is designated pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3) to issue process to Defendant Tara Powers in the manner specified by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d). Process shall consist of the amended complaint, applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this entry. The clerk ...


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.