United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division
COLIN STIRLING BRUCE, District Judge.
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se from his detention in the Rushville Treatment and Detention Center, alleges that he was not provided sufficient drinking water for five days in April of 2013, while a boil order was in effect. Defendant Scott, the Director of the Center, moves for summary judgment. The Court views the evidence in the light most favorable to Plaintiff at this stage, resolving material factual disputes in Plaintiff's favor. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).
In April of 2013, Defendant Scott learned from the county health department that a boil order would be in effect beginning April 25, 2013. Scott caused a memo to be posted informing residents and staff of the boil order which stated:
The TDF has been informed by the Schuyler County Illinois Health Department that during the boil order, which is to start at 12:01 a.m. on Thursday, 4/25/13, the facility can still utilize tap water for showers, brushing teeth, laundry, etc. However, any water that residents or staff would consume will need to be boiled before consuming.
(4/24/13 Memo, d/e 16-2, p. 5.)
During the boil order, dietary workers brought about three gallons of boiled water to each living unit, which Plaintiff asserts was insufficient for the 31 residents on his living unit.
Plaintiff does not dispute that he was able to boil as much water as he wanted from the sink in his room, using the microwave on the unit. (Pl.'s Dep. p. 23)("And, like I said, it was instructed, if you need extra, boil it in the microwave. You can boil as much as you want in the microwave."). Although he did not have access to the microwave when he was locked in his room at night, Plaintiff could have microwaved a bowl of water to take to his room before lock-up. (Pl.'s Dep. 20.)
Plaintiff tried boiling his tap water in the microwave, but, according to Plaintiff, he could not drink the boiled water because it had "an inch of silt on the bottom, " was "cloudy" and "had had an awful taste to it." (Defs.' Undisputed Fact 12.) Plaintiff could not get the water past his "gag reflex." (Pl.'s Aff. para. 3.) Plaintiff testified that he felt dehydrated, lethargic, and dizzy. (Pl.'s Dep. 11-13.) Plaintiff does not say whether he had access to other liquids such as milk or juice.
On April 30, 2014, a memo to staff and residents signed by Defendant Scott was posted which stated in relevant part:
Effective immediately the Boil Order has been lifted for the City of Rushville, including the TDF. The City Water Department advised the TDF that the boil order was a precautionary measure for piping modifications and the installation of new pipes in the water system. The city Water Department assured the TDF that it is not necessary to flush the complete water system at the TDF and the water can be used immediately.
(4/30/13 Memo, d/e 16-2, p. 3.)
Even viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, as required, Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. , 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986), no ...