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.

Walker v. Lamb

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

September 5, 2019

JAMES E. WALKER, #R02343, Plaintiff,
v.
NICK LAMB, KEVIN KINK, L. LIVINGSTON, A. BLAKE, JOHN DOE 1, JOHN DOE 2, JANE DOE 1, JANE DOE 2, and JANE DOE 3, Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          STACI M. YANDLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Plaintiff James E. Walker, an inmate of the Illinois Department of Corrections currently incarcerated at Lawrence Correctional Center ("Lawrence"), brings this action for alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff asserts a First Amendment retaliation claim and an Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to serious medical needs claim. (Doc. 10). He seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief.

         This case is now before the Court for preliminary review of the Amended Complaint[1] under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires the Court to screen prisoner Complaints to filter out nonmeritorious claims. 28 U.S.C. § l9l5A(a). Any portion of the Complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or requests money damages from an immune defendant must be dismissed. 28U.S.C. § l9l5A(b).

         The Amended Complaint

         Plaintiffs make the following allegations in the Amended Complaint: Plaintiff suffers from chronic medical conditions including back pain, arthritis, sinusitis, and gastrointestinal issues. (Doc. 10, p. 9). He regularly takes medication for his back, sinus, and gastrointestinal conditions. At various times during his confinement at Lawrence, one or more of the defendants have prevented him from timely obtaining medical care and necessary medication.

         Plaintiff made repeated requests in late December 2016 for his back pain and sinus medications, but he was ignored by the Health Care Unit ("HCU") at Lawrence. He filed a grievance regarding these issues, which was denied by Blake with Lamb concurring. When he was finally seen at the HCU in December 2016, Jane Doe 1 informed him that his pain and sinus medication had not arrived at Lawrence following his transfer from Menard. She refused to treat him or to provide him any alternative medications that proved effective.

         Plaintiff was barred from the HCU for over three months by Jane Doe 2 in retaliation for historical grievances and to discourage Plaintiff from seeking treatment at the HCU. Also, in August 2018, Jane Doe 2 told Plaintiff he would be referred to a doctor but then refused to make the referral because Plaintiff would not sign a money voucher for the referral. (Doc. 10, pp. 9-10). Plaintiff filed a grievance regarding Jane Doe 2's misconduct and her refusal to make the referral was endorsed by Livingston, Lamb, or Kink. (Doc. 10, p. 10).

         Plaintiff attempted to return to the HCU each week in September 2018 for his back pain and allergy issues, but his visits were cancelled by the HCU and officers John Doe 1 (one house A wing) and John Doe 2 (three house A wing). Plaintiff was denied access to the HCU each week in October 2018 in retaliation for various grievances over the repeated refusals to provide him access to health care. During the month of October 2018, Plaintiff made requests relating to his back pain and sinus issues and for medication refills which were denied or ignored by Jane Doe 3. He filed a grievance on these issues, which was denied by Blake with Lamb concurring.

         Based on the allegations in the Amended Complaint, the Court finds it convenient to divide this action into the following Counts:

Count 1:Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to serious medical needs claim against Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, John Doe 1, and John Doe 2 for delaying and/or denying Plaintiff medical care for his chronic medication conditions.
Count 2:Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to serious medical needs claim against Lamb, Kink, Livingston, and Blake for denying Plaintiffs grievances regarding delays and denial of medical care for his chronic health conditions.
Count 3:First Amendment claim against Jane Doe 2 and Jane Doe 3 for delaying and/or denying medical care for Plaintiffs chronic medical conditions in retaliation for Plaintiff filing grievances.

         The parties and the Court will use these designations in all future pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by a judicial officer of the Court. The designations do not constitute an opinion regarding their merit. Any other intended claim that has not been recognized by theCourt is considered dismissed ...


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.