United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ORDER SCREENING COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING SERVICE OF
Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge.
Austin Blaize, an inmate at the Pendleton Correctional
Facility (Pendleton), brings this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his Eighth Amendment right
to be free from cruel and unusual punishment was violated by
the defendants' deliberate indifference to his serious
medical needs. Mr. Blaize has paid the initial partial filing
fee. Dkt. 8. Because Mr. Blaize is a “prisoner”
as defined by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(c), this Court has an
obligation under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a) to screen his
complaint before service on the defendants.
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), the Court must dismiss the
complaint, or any portion of the 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 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 Cesal v. Moats, 851 F.3d 714, 720 (7th
Blaize filed a complaint on September 10, 2019, naming the
following defendants: (1) Dr. Paul Talbot; and (2) Wexford
Health Services, Inc. (Wexford). The complaint names Dr.
Talbot in his individual capacity. Mr. Blaize seeks
compensatory and punitive damages.
Blaize alleges that in the fall of 2017, he was sent to the
infirmary after being stabbed in the face. The force from the
stabbing caused him to lose consciousness and resulted in a
concussion and chronic traumatic encephalopathy. Mr. Blaize
was in severe pain and required stitches on his forehead and
under his left eye.
Talbot allegedly failed to provide treatment to Mr. Blaize
consistent with “free world standards.” He
refused to administer pain medication, ointment, or wound
care. He also failed to evaluate Mr. Blaize for signs of
concussion, monitor him for signs of brain swelling, or order
brain imaging scans. Rather than treat Mr. Blaize for his
serious medical condition, Dr. Talbot allegedly interrogated
him and placed him on “hold pending
investigation” in the R-cellhouse.
employees are allegedly not trained or are unwilling to
monitor patients for signs of brain swelling. Consequently,
Mr. Blaize was not monitored for this life-threatening
action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. To state
a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the
violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of
the United States and must show that the alleged deprivation
was committed by a person acting under color of state law.
West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). “[T]he
first step in any [§ 1983] claim is to identify the
specific constitutional right infringed.” Albright
v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266, 271 (1994). “The Eighth
Amendment prohibits the unnecessary and wanton infliction of
pain, which includes [d]eliberate indifference to serious
medical needs of prisoners.” Knight v.
Grossman, 942 F.3d 336, 340 (7th Cir. 2019)
(internal quotation omitted).
on the screening standard set forth above, Mr. Blaize's
Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claims shall proceed
against Dr. Talbot and Wexford.
summary of claims includes all viable claims identified by
the Court. If Mr. Blaize believes that additional claims were
alleged in the complaint but not identified by the Court, he
shall have ...