United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. ROSENSTENGEL CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE.
Paris Taylor, an inmate of the Illinois Department of
Corrections (“IDOC”) currently incarcerated at
Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”), brings
this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff
claims that he has been denied adequate medical treatment for
his chronic vision problems. Following preliminary review of
the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Plaintiff
was allowed to proceed on the following claim.:
Count 1: Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants for
exhibiting deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's chronic
warden was added to the docket in his official capacity
because it appeared Plaintiff might be seeking prospective
Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to File a First Amended
Complaint (Doc. 31) and a proposed First Amended Complaint.
In the motion, Plaintiff states he wants to make a claim for
injunctive relief and add the Warden of Menard as a defendant
for that claim. He also seeks to add a Monell claim
against Wexford and expand the factual basis for that claim.
Defendants oppose the motion (Doc. 32) on the basis that the
First Amended Complaint does not add a new defendant or new
claim as the Warden of Menard is already a defendant and
there is a Monell claim proceeding against Wexford.
They also argue that it is not necessary for Plaintiff to add
a claim for injunctive relief because that issue is raised in
Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction.
Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) states that “the court
should freely give leave when justice so requires.”
Nonetheless, the First Amended Complaint is still subject to
review under Section 1915A. Accordingly, prior to granting
leave to amend, the Court will screen the First Amended
First Amended Complaint
realleges the allegations from the Complaint, which are
summarized in the Court's merit review order dated April
17, 2019 (Doc. 8) and will not be repeated here. Plaintiff
adds the following allegations in the First Amended
Complaint: On May 11, 2018, Plaintiff woke up with a severe
headache and blurry vision in his right eye. He sought
medical attention. The cell house nurse immediately sent him
to an ophthalmologist. The ophthalmologist determined that he
had high pressure in his right eye and recommended emergency
surgery. Wexford Health Resources, Inc. medical staff at
Menard was informed of the need for emergency surgery.
and its employees attempted to avoid scheduling the surgery.
Plaintiff was forced to file emergency grievances on June 5
and 18, 2018, in an attempt to receive the medical treatment
needed for his right eye. The Warden accepted the grievances
and ordered an expedited review. Wexford unreasonably delayed
the surgery. Plaintiff suffered severe headaches, blurry
vision, and his daily activities were effected until he
finally received the surgery.
needs new eyeglasses because he strains to see with his
current glasses that he received in 2010 and 2013. This
strain causes pressure to increase in his eyes, which is
counterproductive to the surgical procedures he has had on
seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief. He wants
“updated/appropriate glasses” and “to
receive all the care/treatment plans that the specialist at
Quantum Visions instructed the Plaintiff must have to prevent
him from suffering undue pain and ultimately losing his
on the allegations in the First Amended Complaint, the Court
designates the following claims:
Count 1: Eighth Amendment claim against Sutterer and Siddiqui
for exhibiting deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's