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.

Burke v. Illinois Dep't of Corrections

October 2, 2006

CALVIN BURKE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET.AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Harold A. Baker United States District Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff alleges that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his periodontal disease during his incarceration at Illinois River Correctional Center. Before the Court are Defendants' unopposed motions for summary judgment (d/e's 40, 43). The undisputed facts show that the defendants were not deliberately indifferent. Accordingly, the motions will be granted and this case terminated.

Summary Judgment Standard

A party moving for summary judgment must show, from the "pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, . . ." that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the "moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Outlaw v. Newkirk, 259 F.3d 833, 837 (7th Cir. 2001), citing Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986); Fed. R. Civ. P.56(c). This burden can be satisfied by "'showing'--that is, pointing out to the district court--that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party's case." Celotex, 477 U.S. at 325. If such a showing is made, the burden shifts to the non-movant to "set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e); Outlaw, 259 F.3d at 837. A nonmoving party cannot rest on its pleadings, but must demonstrate that there is admissible evidence that will support its position. Tolle v. Carroll Touch, Inc., 23 F.3d 174, 178 (7th Cir. 1994). In determining whether factual issues exist, the court must view all the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Beraha v. Baxter Health Corp., 956 F.2d 1436, 1440 (7th Cir. 1992).

Undisputed Facts

Plaintiff has not responded to the summary judgment motions. The plaintiff was warned that "[u]nder the court's local rules, a motion is deemed to be uncontested if no opposing brief is filed." (d/e's 42, 44). The same notices warned the plaintiff that, "If you do not submit affidavits or other documentary evidence contradicting the defendants' assertions, the defendants' statement of facts will be accepted as true for purposes of summary judgment." Id.

The court has reviewed the proposed undisputed facts submitted by Defendants Wexford Health Sources, Dr. Osafo, and Dr. Awada (d/e 43, p. 3-15) and finds them well supported by their cites to the record. Those facts show beyond dispute that Dr. Awada, the dentist responsible for treating the plaintiff's teeth, was not deliberately indifferent to the plaintiff's tooth problems. Accordingly, the plaintiff suffered no Eighth Amendment violation.*fn1 The court adopts, essentially verbatim and with their cites, the undisputed facts proposed by Defendants Wexford Health Sources, Dr. Osafo, and Dr. Awada (d/e 43, p. 3-15). These facts dispose of the case; it is not necessary to set forth Defendant Bohler's facts.

1 Dr. Osafo is currently the Medical Director at the Illinois River Correctional Center in Canton, Illinois. (See Exhibit 1.)

2. Dr. Osafo was the Medical Director at the Illinois River Correctional Center during the relevant time frames from November 2004 through Plaintiff's transfer to East Moline Correctional Center in September of 2005. (See Exhibit 1.)

3. In his role as the Medical Director at the Illinois River Correctional Center, Dr. Osafo has personally examined Calvin Burke, B-60083, for various complaints. (See Exhibit 1.)

4. In Dr. Osafo's opinion, the Plaintiff was appropriately referred to the dentist for complaints relating to his teeth and/or gums. (See Exhibits 1 and 1A.)

5. Dr. Osafo personally saw Mr. Burke on December 9, 2004 for right ear pain, which was noted in conjunction with a dental examination. Pursuant to his examination, Mr. Burke's ear showed no obvious abnormality. In Dr. Osafo's opinion, Mr. Burke's ear examination was normal. Dr. Osafo therefore referred Mr. Burke back to the dentist for another evaluation. (See Exhibits 1 and 1B.)

6. With respect to any complaints concerning Mr. Burke's gums and/or dental work, the Plaintiff would be referred to the onsite dentist, who was Dr. Awada during the time frame in question. (See Exhibits 1 and 1A through 1E.)

7. According to Dr. Osafo's recollection and review of the Plaintiff's medical records,Dr. Awada treated each and every complaint made by Mr. Burke that was presented to him. (See Exhibit 1.)

8. At no time did Dr. Awada recommend that Calvin Burke receive care offsite relating to his dental care. (See Exhibits 1and 2.)

9. Dr. Osafo relied upon Dr. Awada's care and treatment of this patient as Dr. Awada is more qualified than Dr. Osafo with respect to dental issues and making such determinations. (See Exhibits 1 and 2.)

10. On each and every occasion that Dr. Osafo evaluated Calvin Burke, he was properly assessed and treated for any medical problems he presented at the time. In Dr. Osafo's medical opinion, Mr. Burke did not require further treatment for the conditions presented while he was an inmate at the Illinois River Correctional Center. (See Exhibit 1.)

11. Based upon Dr. Osafo's personal experience and review of Calvin Burke's medical records, there are no conditions noted which presented a substantial risk of harm to Mr. Burke. (See Exhibits 1 and 2A through 2I.)

12. Dr. Osafo agreed with the evaluation of Dr. Awada regarding his recommendation that tooth #31 be extracted. (See Exhibit 1.)

13. Dr. Osafo has no medical reason to disagree with Dr. Awada's assessment that Plaintiff's swelling of his gums, irritation, drainage, and pus were related to an abscess at that particular tooth. (See Exhibit 1.)

14. In reviewing Plaintiff's medical records, it appears that Mr. Burke's symptoms relating to drainage and swelling were alleviated with care and treatment provided by Dr. Awada in the form of antibiotics, pain relievers, and regular monitoring. (See Exhibits 1 and 2A through 2I.)

16. In Dr. Osafo's medical opinion and judgment, periodontitis did not constitute a serious medical need for Mr. Burke while he was an inmate at the Illinois River Correctional Center. (See Exhibit 1.)

17. As of the time he was transferred to the East Moline Correctional Center, Mr. Burke suffered from no pus and no drainage. (See Exhibits 1 and 2F and 2G.)

18. At no time did Dr. Osafo provide any direct care to Mr. Burke regarding his gums or his teeth. (See Exhibits 1 and 1A through 1H.)

20. Dr. Osafo relied upon Exhibits 1A through 1H and Exhibits 2A through 2I to the extent necessary and referenced in providing his care and treatment to Mr. Burke and in formulating his opinions contained herein. (See Exhibit 1.)

21. Dr. Awada is a licensed dentist practicing in the state of Illinois. (See Exhibit 2.)

22. In Dr. Awada's capacity as a dentist, he has treated various inmates at the Illinois River Correctional Center, including Calvin Burke, the Plaintiff in this case. (See Exhibit 2.)

25. Calvin Burke suffers from periodontal disease. (See Exhibits 2 and 2A.)

26. Periodontal disease results from a buildup of bacteria in the mouth which allows plaque to build up along and under the gum ...


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.