The opinion of the court was delivered by: Stiehl, District Judge
Plaintiff, an inmate in the Big Muddy River Correctional Center, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action was originally filed in Illinois state court and removed to this forum by Defendants, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441. Defendants have paid the filing fee for the action.
The Court will first perform a preliminary review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), which provides:
Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that --
(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or
(B) the action or appeal --
(I) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or
(iii) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). An action or claim is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Upon careful review of the complaint and any supporting exhibits, the Court finds that none of the claims in the complaint may be dismissed at this point in the litigation.
Plaintiff was inflicted with poliomyelitis as a child. As a result of the illness, he suffers today from a deformed foot that causes him excruciating pain and greatly limits his mobility. In 2003, while an inmate in the Illinois Department of Corrections, Plaintiff received treatment from an orthopedic specialist. This physician recommended surgery, but due to budget constraints, surgery was never scheduled. On September 3, 2003, the orthopedist did, however, provide Plaintiff with orthopedic shoes that greatly eased his pain and corrected his gait. Plaintiff was also given a low bunk/low gallery permit, restricted from heavy lifting and prolonged standing, and housed with a non-smoking cellmate. On July 8, 2004, Plaintiff's corrective shoes were confiscated by Corrections Officer Butler (not a defendant) and destroyed, despite Plaintiff's protestations. On April 24, 2005, Plaintiff was seen by Defendant Feinerman. Plaintiff told Defendant Feinerman of his destroyed shoes and resulting difficulty walking and excruciating pain. Plaintiff requested surgery to permanently correct the problem. After examining Plaintiff, Defendant Feinerman denied surgery, corrective shoes, examination by an orthopedic specialist, and despite Plaintiff's statements of severe pain and requests for treatment or pain-relieving medication, refused any additional treatment or medication.
Plaintiff states that Defendant Feinerman was aware of Plaintiff's serious medical need, yet recklessly disregarded it by refusing to provide any treatment, thus acting with deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Plaintiff also states that Defendant Wexford Health Sources, Inc. "maintained a policy of discouraging their physicians . . . from providing medical care to inmates, as a means of reducing its costs," ...