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.

Bradley v. Wexford, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

August 6, 2019

DEANDRE BRADLEY, #M05197, Plaintiff,
v.
WEXFORD, INC., DR. M. SIDDIQUI, and RON SKIDMORE, Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          STACI M. YANDLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Plaintiff Deandre Bradley is an inmate of the Illinois Department of Corrections (“IDOC”) currently incarcerated at Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”). The instant case, severed from Bradley v. Wexford, Inc., et al., No. 19-cv-00733-NJR on July 11, 2019 (Doc. 1), contains the claim designated as Count 10 in the original case:

Count 10: Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against Wexford, John Doe #1, and Skidmore related to his wheelchair and seat cushion issues.[1]

         Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is now before the Court for a preliminary review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Under § 1915A, the Court is required to screen prisoner Complaints to filter out non-meritorious claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Any portion of a Complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks money damages from a defendant who by law is immune from such relief, must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).

         The Amended Complaint

         Plaintiff makes the following allegations in the Amended Complaint: Plaintiff is a paraplegic and cannot walk. He must use a wheelchair and suffers from pressure sores. He was given a wheelchair that was large and heavy. It was dangerous in combination with his hypertension and asthma. The ill-fitting wheelchair made it difficult for Plaintiff to go about daily activities and caused him to suffer pain. Plaintiff needs a properly fitted wheelchair and a specialized seat cushion to prevent pain and pressure sores.

         Plaintiff advised Dr. Siddiqui and Ron Skidmore of his needs and they refused to accommodate him. He asked them to send him to a specialist for a proper wheelchair fitting and they also refused that request. Dr. Siddiqui and Skidmore told Plaintiff that cost was an issue. Plaintiff was recently provided a smaller, lighter wheelchair but it does not address all of his needs.

         Wexford does not employ any physicians who can properly fit and prescribe adequate wheelchairs. Wexford has refused to provide Plaintiff a proper wheelchair and the specialized seat cushion because of the costs.

         Based on the allegations of the Amended Complaint, the Court modifies Count 10 and designates Count 13 as follows:

Count 10: Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against Wexford, Siddiqui, and Skidmore related to his wheelchair and seat cushion issues.
Count 13: ADA and/or RA claim against Wexford for failing to employ an individual who can properly fit and prescribe adequate wheelchairs.

         The parties and the Court will use these designations in all future pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by a judicial officer of this Court. These designations do not constitute an opinion regarding their merit. Any other claim that is mentioned in the Amended Complaint but not addressed in this Order should be considered dismissed without prejudice as inadequately pled under the Twombly pleading standard.[2]

         Discussion

         Coun ...


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.