United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. ROSENSTENGEL CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on a Report and Recommendation of
United States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 69), which
recommends that the Motion for Summary Judgment Based on
Exhaustion filed by Defendants Dr. Alberto Butalid, Dr.
Roderick Matticks, Dr. Michael Scott, Dr. Vipin Shah, and
Wexford Health Sources, Inc. be denied and the Motion for
Summary Judgment on the Issue of Exhaustion filed by
Defendants Christine Brown and Louis Shicker be granted in
part and denied in part.
Report and Recommendation was entered on March 29, 2019.
Defendants Dr. Butalid, Dr. Matticks, Dr. Scott, Dr. Shah,
and Wexford have filed an Objection to the Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 70). Plaintiff Stanislaus Lawrence
Laktas (“Laktas”) has filed a Response to that
Objection (Doc. 71).
an inmate of the Illinois Department of Corrections
(“IDOC”), was incarcerated at Pinckneyville
Correctional Center (“Pinckneyville”) at the time
he initiated this action. Laktas proceeds on the following
Count 1: Eighth Amendment deliberate
indifference claim against Dr. Shah, Dr. Scott, and Dr.
Butalid, for failing to provide treatment for Laktas's
pain, including failing to request servicing of his implanted
Count 2: Eighth Amendment deliberate
indifference claim against Dr. Shah, Dr. Scott, Dr. Butalid,
and Dr. Matticks for failing to refer Laktas for carpal
Count 3: Eighth Amendment deliberate
indifference claim against Wexford for failing to have
Laktas's implant serviced, and for delaying and failing
to approve Laktas's recommended carpal tunnel surgery;
Count 4: Eighth Amendment deliberate
indifference claim against Brown and Shicker, for failing to
take any action to assist Laktas in obtaining pain relief or
servicing of his neurostimulation implant after Laktas wrote
to them about the other Defendants' lack of care; and
against Shicker for failing to take action regarding
Laktas's need for carpal tunnel surgery.
January 28, 2019, Defendants Dr. Butalid, Dr. Matticks, Dr.
Scott, Dr. Shah, and Wexford (the “Wexford
Defendants”) filed a Motion for Summary Judgment based
on failure to exhaust administrative remedies (Docs. 56 and
57) arguing that Laktas's grievances were untimely and
the continuing violation doctrine does not apply. On February
13, 2019, Defendants Brown and Shicker filed Motion for
Summary Judgment based on failure to exhaust administrative
remedies (Docs. 61 and 62) arguing that Laktas did not
specifically name them in the grievances and the grievances
he filed were untimely.
Report and Recommendation
Daly recommends denying the motion for summary judgment filed
by the Wexford Defendants and granting in part and denying in
part the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants
Brown and Shicker. Judge Daly found the following grievances
to be relevant to the issue of exhaustion of administrative
remedies: December 29, 2014 grievance; December 31, 2015
grievance; and February 11, 2018 grievance.
Daly noted that all of these grievances were denied by the
Administrative Review Board (“ARB”) as untimely
because they were submitted outside the 60-day timeframe
outlined in Department Rule 504. Judge Daly found that,
because Laktas was complaining of the ongoing denial of
medical treatment, the continuing violation doctrine does not
require that he file a grievance within 60 days of the first
violation, rather a grievance can be filed at any time, as
long as the violation continues. Because the alleged
violations were continual, Judge Daly concluded that the
grievances filed on December 29, 2014, December 31, 2015, and
February 11, 2018 were timely filed. Thus, she recommends
denying summary judgment as to the Wexford Defendants.
Daly recognized, however, that Defendant Shicker was not
named or identified in any of these grievances. Thus, she
recommends granting summary judgment as to Defendant Shicker
based on ...