United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
R. HERNDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Quentin Getty, an inmate in Centralia Correctional Center,
brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for
deprivations of his constitutional rights that allegedly
occurred at Centralia and Big Muddy Correctional Centers. In
his Complaint, Plaintiff claims the defendants have been
deliberately indifferent to his serious medical issues in
violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Doc. 1). 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
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.
careful review of the Complaint and any supporting exhibits,
the Court finds it appropriate to allow this case to proceed
past the threshold stage.
Complaint (Doc. 1), Plaintiff makes the following
allegations: on June 20, 2017, Plaintiff was sent to St.
Louis University Hospital to have his shoulder examined by
Defendant Kim, an orthopedic. (Doc. 1, p. 2). Kim performed
range of motion exercises on Plaintiff's left shoulder to
check for stability. Id. During these exercises,
Plaintiff told Kim that he was stretching his shoulder too
far, causing him a lot of pain. Id. Kim disregarded
Plaintiff's complaints and continued to extend his
shoulder until it popped. (Doc. 1, p. 3). Plaintiff screamed,
and Kim apologized for the accident. Id. Kim X-rayed
Plaintiff's shoulder and found it was dislocated.
Id. Kim refused to relocate Plaintiff's
shoulder, telling him that his institution could get it done
faster. Id. Kim told Plaintiff that he could perform
surgery in the future, and when Plaintiff told him that he
was in severe pain and needed treatment at that time, Kim
told him that he did not meet the criteria for immediate
surgery. Id. Plaintiff told Kim that he did not want
surgery in the future and asked to speak with a supervisor.
Id. Kim denied the request. Id.
had to travel in severe pain for two hours until he returned
to the facility. Id. He then had to wait an
additional two hours to meet with Dr. Larson. Id.
Dr. Larson examined Plaintiff's shoulder and immediately
sent him to Crossroads Community Hospital. Id.
Plaintiff met with Dr. Zaki Chowdhury who diagnosed his
condition as a recurrent dislocation. Id. Chowdhury
then relocated Plaintiff's shoulder. Id. The
relocation was short-lived, however, and Plaintiff's
shoulder dislocated again. Id. After an examination
by Dr. Larson, Plaintiff was sent back to Crossroads
Community Hospital. (Doc. 1, pp. 3-4). On July 1, 2017,
Plaintiff met with Dr. Grant who failed to relocate
Plaintiff's shoulder. (Doc. 1, p. 4). Plaintiff was sent
back to Big Muddy, and Dr. Larson sent Plaintiff to St. Louis
University Hospital where he met with another orthopedic who
eventually relocated his shoulder. Id.
4, 2017, Plaintiff met with Dr. Larson who ordered him to
remain in the prison's infirmary for a week. Id.
On July 17, 2017, Plaintiff met with Dr. Larson and informed
him that his pain medication was not working, so he was
prescribed a different medication. Id. During this
time, Plaintiff filed two grievances against Dr. Kim, but
Defendant John/Jane Doe never processed them or responded to
them. Id. On November 7, 2017, Plaintiff's
shoulder dislocated again and was relocated. Id.
November 21, 2017, Plaintiff was transferred to Centralia
Correctional Center. Id. Plaintiff met with
Defendant Santos and told him his history of shoulder issues
and that his pain medication was not working. Id.
Santos reviewed Plaintiff's medical records and told him
that there was no need for further treatment. Id.
Plaintiff pleaded with Santos, explaining that he deals with
complications and pain daily. (Doc. 1, pp. 4-5). Santos told
Plaintiff to leave. (Doc. 1, p. 5). Plaintiff notified
Defendant White that John/Jane Doe refused to process his
grievances and informed him of his medical issues, but White
denied Plaintiff's grievance. Id.
Plaintiff's shoulder never recovered and continued to
dislocate. Id. This information was sent to Santos
who stated that Plaintiff's condition was normal.
Id. Plaintiff continues to have restricted movement
in his shoulder, which causes him aching ...