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.

McDougal v. Orkies

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

June 19, 2018

CARLOS DE'ANDRE MCDOUGAL, Plaintiff,
v.
JASON ORKIES, et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          STACI M. YANDLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Plaintiff Carlos De'Andrew McDougal, an inmate in the custody of the Illinois Department of Corrections (“IDOC”), filed this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated while he was incarcerated at Big Muddy River Correctional Center (“Big Muddy”). Specifically, Plaintiff claims he has continually sought medical treatment for pain of unknown origin in his hand and wrist and has not received proper diagnosis and treatment. Following threshold review, Plaintiff proceeds on the following Counts:

Count 1:Defendants showed deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's serious medical need involving pain in his hand, wrist, and arm in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

         This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies filed by Defendants Dennis Larson and Jason Orkies (Doc. 33). Plaintiff did not file a Response to the Motion, but instead filed an Affidavit regarding the exhaustion of his administrative remedies (Doc. 32). For the following reasons, Defendants' motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

         Factual Background

         McDougal states in his Affidavit that he exhausted his administrative remedies when he filed the following grievances relating to his medical treatment on or around February 6, 2017:

         February 6, 2017 (A): On February 2, 2017, McDougal was treated by the Physician Assistant for pain in his wrist. He does not know why he is being seen by the PA because he had already been seen by the doctor twice about this particular issue. The PA told him there was nothing wrong with his wrist and that it did not look swollen. He was prescribed pain medications and was put in to see the doctor. He requested to be sent to an outside hospital and the PA refused. McDougal states that the PA is deliberately refusing to recommend him for medical treatment. The requested relief was to be sent to an outside hospital.

         The grievance was submitted as an emergency to the Warden who denied the emergency review on February 7, 2017. On February 10, 2017, the Counselor received the grievance and forwarded it to the Health Care Unit Administrator for review. The Administrator responded on March 7, 2017 that she reviewed the offender's medical jacket and that he was being monitored by the HC U.She further stated that a PA cannot send offenders to outside appointments; that would have to be determined by the physician through collegial review. The Counselor responded to the Grievance on March 16, 2017, stating that the PA could not send McDougal to outside appointments.

         The Grievance Officer's Report was issued on March 27, 2017, denying the grievance because the offender was being monitored by the HCU. The CAO concurred with the Report on March 28, 2017. The ARB received the appeal on April 11, 2017 and issued a denial of the appeal on June 12, 2017, concluding that the issue was appropriately addressed by the facility.

         February 6, 2017 (B): McDougal had seen Dr. Larson twice for an injured wrist and on both occasions, the doctor could not diagnose what was wrong with his wrist. The doctor sent him to the physical therapist who also could not diagnose the problem. The doctor then scheduled him for an x-ray which did not show a problem. McDougal alleges his wrist is getting worse and that the refusal to send him to an outside hospital is deliberate indifference. The requested relief is to be sent to a specialist at an outside hospital.

         The grievance was submitted as an emergency to the Warden who denied the emergency review on February 7, 2017. On February 10, 2017, the Counselor received the grievance. The Counselor responded to the Grievance on March 17, 2017, stating that the inmate was being monitored by HCU and was seen by the physician on February 24, 2017, with x-rays ordered and a follow-up in 1-2 weeks. The Counselor further stated that outside referrals will be based on the physician's assessment and collegial review.

         It is unclear to the Court whether the Grievance Officer's Report and CAO concurrence issued regarding the other February 2, 2017 grievance also addressed this grievance. However, the grievance was sent to the ARB along with the other grievance and Grievance Officer's Report. Based on the denial issued, it is again unclear whether the ARB was denying one, or both February 2, 2017 grievances.

         April 27, 2017: McDougal states that on April 13, 2017, he was seen by Dr. Larson regarding his wrist, and the doctor saw no change in his condition and referred him to an Orthopedist. After a week of waiting, on April 21, 2017, he wrote a request to Jason Orkies regarding the status of his referral. The following day, he was called to the foyer for nurse sick call and was told he would be placed on Dr. Larson's call list for the results of the referral. He was informed that the referral request was denied and that his injury would be treated conservatively onsite. He was instructed to re-present if needed. The relief requested was for the denial of the referral to be overturned and to be seen by a specialist.

         The Counselor received the grievance on May 2, 2017 and forwarded it to the HCU for response. On May 19, 2017, the Health Care Unit Administrator responded to the grievance, stating that a collegial review was conducted on April 21, 2017 and that it was determined the offender would be treated ...


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.