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.

Cesal v. Kruse

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

November 7, 2016

CRAIG J. CESAL, Plaintiff,
v.
DOUGLASS ANTHONY KRUSE, KIM SCHNEIDER, ELIZABETH MILLS, RENNA KELLY, J. JOLLIFF, TASHA JOHNSON, ASHLEY KNEBEL, BETTY ULMER, PAUL KELLEY, LOUISE BOW AN, and FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          STACI M. YANDLE U.S. District Judge.

         Plaintiff Craig Cesal, an inmate in Federal Correctional Institution-Terre Haute ("Terre Huate FCI"), brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages and injunctive relief. This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which provides:

(a) Screening - The court shall review, before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.
(b) Grounds for Dismissal - On review, the court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint-
(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

         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). Frivolousness is an objective standard that refers to a claim that any reasonable person would find meritless. Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025, 1026-27 (7th Cir. 2000). An action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The claim of entitlement to relief must cross "the line between possibility and plausibility." Id. at 557. At this juncture, the factual allegations of the pro se complaint are to be liberally construed. See Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d816, 821 (7th Cir. 2009).

         Upon careful review of the Complaint and any supporting exhibits, the Court finds it appropriate to exercise its authority under § 1915A; portions of this action are subject to summary dismissal.

         The Complaint

         This case arises out of events at Federal Correctional Institution - Greenville ("Greenville"), which is located in this judicial district. The following are the relevant allegations of the Complaint (Doc. 1). Plaintiff was housed at Greenville from March 21, 2011 until March 16, 2015. On September 19, 2014, the prison's Clinical Director, Defendant Douglass Kruse, ordered an end to the provision of diabetic snacks. Plaintiff alleges that this decision was problematic for him because dinner is served at 4:30 pm and breakfast is served at 7:00 am, creating a fourteen and a half hour gap between meals. During this gap, Plaintiff had a tendency to experience low blood sugar levels (hypoglycemia).

         Defendant Mills noted that Plaintiff was hypoglycemic on September 22, 2014, but provided no treatment. Mills directed Plaintiff to report further hypoglycemic events to medical.

         Plaintiff did so the next morning on September 23, 2014. Defendant Schneider was called at 3:00 am, and examined Plaintiff at 10:00 am. Schneider terminated Plaintiffs glyburide prescription at that time. Glyberide causes the pancreas in a Type II diabetic to secrete adequate insulin. Schneider told Plaintiff that treating low blood sugars with food alone was inappropriate and that a medication adjustment was a better, long term solution. Schneider also terminated Plaintiffs pain medication for his sciatica during the same visit. Schneider was angry and wrote an incident report dated September 23, 2014 which charged Plaintiff with possessing ibuprofen, after she cancelled the prescription.

         As a result of the medication change, Plaintiffs blood sugar levels soared. From September 23, 2014 until March 16, 2015, the prison's registered nurses checked Plaintiffs blood sugars twice daily and recorded numerous measurements of over 400 and 500 units. An acceptable range is between 70 and 120 units. None of the nurses provided Plaintiff with any treatment for his high blood sugar levels. Defendant Kelly measured Plaintiffs blood sugar between September 23, 2014 and March 16, 2015. Specifically, she noted a level of 438 on November 11, 2014 and a level of 448 on November 14, 2015, but provided no treatment on either of those days. Defendant Jolliff measured Plaintiffs blood sugar at 436 on November 11, 2014, but provided no treatment. Defendant Johnson took a blood sugar reading of 449 on November 2, 2014, but provided no treatment. Defendant Knebel took a blood sugar reading of 488 on November 23, 2014, but provided no treatment. Defendant Ulmer measured Plaintiffs blood sugar at 482 on November 1, 2014, but provided no treatment. Defendant Kelley took a blood sugar reading of 448 on November 14, 2014, but provided no treatment On December 14, 2014, Defendant Bowen took a blood pressure reading of 201, but provided no treatment.

         Plaintiff received an incident report from Defendant Kruse for refusing to sign a refusal of treatment form on October 22, 2014. He received another incident report from Defendant Kelley on February 20, 2015 for refusing to obey a direct order, refusing to program and insolence. Defendant Kelley charged ...


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.