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.

Orozcoo v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

January 5, 2018

VICTOR OROZCO, Plaintiff,
v.
WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC, et. al, Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          STACI M. YANDLE United States District Judge.

         Plaintiff Victor Orozco, an inmate in the custody of the Illinois Department of Corrections

         (“IDOC”), filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated while he was incarcerated at Lawrence Correctional Center (“Lawrence”). Plaintiff asserts claims against Wexford Health Sources, Inc. (“Wexford”), Dr. John Coe, Travis James, Phill Martin, Beth Tredway, Counselor Henton, and Nurses Jane Doe and John Doe. He alleges that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Following threshold screening, Plaintiff proceeds on the following counts:

Count 1: Defendants Coe and James violated Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment rights by unnecessarily delaying his treatment for prolonged stomach pain of undiagnosed origin, maintaining a course of treatment that proved ineffective, and failing to further inquire into Plaintiff's condition or refer him to a specialist when his condition persisted;
Count 2: Defendant Wexford maintained a policy, custom, and/or practice of elevating concerns regarding the cost of inmate care over the quality of care in order to minimize its costs in violation of Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment rights;
Count 4: Defendants Henton and Martin violated Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment rights by taking inadequate steps to intervene and ensure his receipt of proper medical care upon receipt of grievances regarding the same.

         This matter is currently before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies filed by Defendants Wexford Health Sources, Inc. and Physician Assistant Travis James (Doc. 52). Plaintiff failed to file a response to defendants' motion. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is GRANTED as to Defendant Travis James and DENIED as to Defendant Wexford.

         Factual Background

         In support of their motion, Defendants assert that Plaintiff did not describe Defendant James or timely grieve Defendant James' treatment and that no grievance in evidence mentions or describes Wexford. Because Plaintiff failed to file a response to Defendants' motion, the Court will look to the grievances attached to the Plaintiff's Verified Complaint (Doc. 1).

         Plaintiff attached five grievances to his Complaint concerning the medical treatment he received for his stomach. His earliest grievance is dated July 27, 2015, and states that he has a burning in his stomach and would like to be seen by a gastroenterologist (Plaintiff's Complaint, Doc. 1 at 62-63). The grievance further states that “Dr. Coe” has failed to diagnose or treat his medical condition (Id.). This grievance was denied by the Chief Administrative Officer (“CAO”) on November 10, 2015 and received by the ARB on November 30, 2015 (Doc. 53-1 at 12, 53-54). Plaintiff's grievance dated October 19, 2015, requests that he be given the proper diagnosis and medications as well as checkups needed for his illness, ulcers and burning of the stomach (Doc. 1 at 65-66). This grievance also specifically mentions the medical treatment provided by Dr. Coe (Id.). The grievance was denied by the ARB on July 19, 2016 (Doc. 53-1 at 12). Defendants acknowledge the October 19, 2015 and October 19, 2015 grievances exhaust Plaintiff's administrative remedies as to Dr. Coe.

         Plaintiff's grievance dated November 3, 2015, states that he has continually requested medical care for his stomach problems, but has been rejected and responded to in a laughing manner by Dr. Coe (Doc. 1 at 58-59). He requests to be taken care of in the proper manner and to be given the chance to see a gastroenterologist (Id.). The grievance was denied by the Correctional Counselor on December 10, 2015 (Doc. 53-1 at 18). The grievance was stamped received by the ARB, but the date is eligible (Id.). No. further information is provided as to this grievance.

         Plaintiff's grievance dated November 15, 2015, states that the conditions of the cells are unsanitary and that he believes these conditions are contributing to his stomach problems (Id. at 60-61). Plaintiff further alleges that Dr. Coe does not have the knowledge needed to address his medical problems and that he needs to see a gastroenterologist (Id.). This grievance was denied by the Correctional Counselor for being outside the 60 day timeframe (Doc. 53-1 at 22). The grievance was stamped received by the ARB, but again, the date is eligible (Id.). No. further information is provided as to this grievance.

         Plaintiff's grievance dated February 23, 2016, states that he is grieving, “staff conduct medical personnel, doctors, and dietary condition at Lawrence” (Id. at 52-53). Plaintiff states, “For over 1 ½ medical staff and Doctor Coe fail to diagnose my medical condition and fail to give me proper treatment and medications they are prolonging aid” (Id.). He asserts that Dr. Coe will not give him the test he needs and will not refer him to other doctors (Id.). The relief requested is to be seen by a gastroenterologist (Id.). This grievance contains no responses from officials at Lawrence (Doc. 53-1 at 25). The grievance was received by the ARB on February 26, 2016. The ARB responded on March 9, 2016, informing Plaintiff that he needed to provide additional information needed to be provided (Id.). No. further information is provided as to this grievance.

         Legal ...


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.