United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MICHAEL J. REAGAN U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE.
Deandre Bradley, an inmate who is currently incarcerated in
Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”), brings
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
for deprivations of his constitutional rights at Shawnee
Correctional Center (“Shawnee”). In the
Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that he sustained a
pre-incarceration stab wound near his spinal cord that left
him permanently disabled. (Doc. 1). He now requires the use
of a walker and/or wheelchair, which he was denied by
officials at Shawnee in violation of his constitutional
rights. Id. Plaintiff seeks monetary relief against
the defendants. (Doc. 1, pp. 8-9). He also requests
injunctive relief, in the form of unspecified “medical
treatment and care” and timely responses to his
requests for the same at Shawnee. (Doc. 1, p. 9).
before filing this action on August 14, 2017, Plaintiff filed
a similar lawsuit in this District against the same
defendants on August 3, 2017. See Bradley v.
Dennison, No. 17-cv-00829-SMY (S.D. Ill. 2017). The two
suits appeared to be duplicative of one another, and
Plaintiff failed to pay a filing fee for this action or seek
leave to proceed in forma pauperis
(“IFP”) without prepaying the fee. Therefore,
this Court entered an Order requiring Plaintiff to confirm,
in writing, his intent to pursue this new case and to pay his
$400.00 filing fee or file an IFP Motion. (Doc. 4). The Court
deferred its preliminary review of this matter pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915A until Plaintiff satisfied both
obligations on September 28, 2017. (Docs. 5, 8).
case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the
Complaint pursuant to § 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
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.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir.
2009). The Complaint survives preliminary review under this
Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that he sustained a stab wound
near his spinal cord prior to his incarceration. (Doc. 1, p.
1). The injury caused permanent disability. Id.
Plaintiff now suffers from limited mobility. Id. He
requires the use of a walker to travel short distances and a
wheelchair for longer distances. Id. He also
requires the use of various medical devicesto assist with his
digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, circulatory, and
respiratory functions. Id. Plaintiff suffers from
bouts of stool incontinence that necessitate frequent
Shawnee officials denied Plaintiff the use of a walker
beginning on March 10, 2017, Plaintiff met with Karen Smoot
(health care administrator and ADA coordinator) and Doctor
David (prison physician) to discuss his “safety
concerns” on March 20, 2017. (Doc. 1, p. 1). Following
the meeting, Warden Dennison, Administrator Smoot, and Doctor
David made the collective decision to house Plaintiff in the
health care unit (“HCU”) infirmary. Id.
Doctor David also granted Plaintiff permission to shower as
needed, take extra time to walk to the shower, and exercise
in the infirmary hallways. (Doc. 1, p. 2).
corrections and medical staff refused to carry out these
orders. (Doc. 1, p. 2). Plaintiff became involved in several
verbal altercations with staff when they denied him shower
access. Id. On April 30, 2017, staff became physical
with Plaintiff twice. Id. Afterwards, he was issued
a false disciplinary ticket for attempting to assault a staff
was punished with segregation in the infirmary's
isolation cell. (Doc. 1, p. 2). While there, medical and
corrections staff continued to deny him shower access.
Id. His condition deteriorated to the point that he
required a wheelchair to travel approximately ten feet from
his cell to the shower. Id.
spoke with Doctor David on May 9, 2017. (Doc. 1, p. 2). The
doctor warned Plaintiff that his physical condition would
continue to deteriorate, if he did not get up from his
wheelchair and exercise. Id. The doctor then
canceled Plaintiff's order for a wheelchair and
instructed him to use a walker instead. (Doc. 1, pp. 2-3).
The same day, Lieutenant Bradford, Sergeant Marvin, and
unidentified segregation staff members transported Plaintiff
by wheelchair to his new segregation housing assignment in
Building One. (Doc. 1, p. 3).
May 5, 2017 and May 24, 2017, Plaintiff was allowed a single
shower by security staff. (Doc. 1, p. 3). It took staff two
days to provide Plaintiff with property that included bedding
and sheets. Id. It took almost five days to obtain
necessary medical supplies, including Fleet enemas, external
male catheters, and diapers. Id. Plaintiff had no
choice but to reuse medical equipment that was intended for a
single use. Id. In the process, his penis became
severely irritated and developed large “lumps and
bumps” that caused him to suffer from physical and
emotional pain. Id.
was also denied the use of a walker in Building One. (Doc. 1,
p. 3). Staff told him that it was not allowed in segregation.
Id. When Plaintiff moved from his bed to the door
for food or medication, he had nothing to support him.
Id. Consequently, Plaintiff fell on three separate
occasions and injured his right leg, knee, and foot.
Id. He suffered from bruising, swelling, and
permanent injury. Id. Plaintiff asked staff for
immediate medical attention each time, but they ignored him.
Id. After several requests, the staff instructed
Plaintiff to submit a sick call request. Id. He
submitted several requests between May 11, 2017 and May 25,
2017, but he was not seen by medical staff. Id.
eventually lied and complained of chest pain because he knew
that he would be sent to the HCU for treatment. (Doc. 1, p.
4). Once there, he told medical staff about his leg, foot,
and penis, but they refused to treat him. Id. When
Plaintiff also complained about the denial of a walker,
corrections staff told him to “shut up” because
he “wasn't allowed to have it.” Id.
Medical staff instead recommended that Plaintiff submit a
sick call request for the walker. Id. When he did,
they ignored his request. Id.
submitted weekly written and verbal complaints during this
entire time period to Warden Dennison. (Doc. 1, p. 2). He
complained about being denied access to the prison's
programs, services, and activities. Id. Warden
Dennison assured him that a meeting would be scheduled to
discuss his concerns. Id. It is unclear whether the
Dennison did respond to a grievance that Plaintiff filed in
late May. (Doc. 1, p. 4). In the grievance, Plaintiff
complained about the conditions described above. Id.
In response, Plaintiff was moved to a new cell on May 24,
2017. Id. He was not placed in “the safest
housing” but was allowed to take showers each day
beginning sometime after his transfer. Id. He was
also allowed to use a walker. Id. When Warden
Dennison visited Plaintiff at his new cell, he allegedly
feigned ignorance about Plaintiff's living conditions in
Building One. Id.
26, 2017, Plaintiff received a pass to speak with a mental
health provider via telemedicine. (Doc. 1, p. 4). While
waiting for the appointment, he spoke with Ethan Wilke, the
prison nursing director. Id. After describing his
medical conditions, his need for a walker, and his denial of
medical care for the leg and foot injury, Wilke directed
Nurse Jessica to place Plaintiff on the sick call list.
Id. He was seen by Nurse Perkins two days later and
given antifungal ...