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.

Moore v. Williams

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

December 11, 2019

SHUNG MOORE, Plaintiff,
v.
AUGUSTA WILLIAMS, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          NANCY J. ROSENSTENGEL CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

         Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 105), in which she recommends the undersigned grant the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Augusta Williams (Doc. 99). Plaintiff Shung Moore filed a timely objection to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 110). For the reasons set forth below, the Court adopts Judge Daly's recommendation and grants Defendant's motion.

         Background

         Plaintiff Shung Moore filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on September 1, 2017, alleging Defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was incarcerated at Menard Correctional Center (Doc. 1). After various Court orders, Moore is proceeding on one claim: that Defendant Williams was deliberately indifferent for delaying and denying treatment for his painful facial MRSA infection, in violation of the Eighth Amendment (Doc. 88).

         On April 10, 2015, Moore submitted a slip to sick call regarding a potential MRSA infection on his face (Doc. 104 at p. 3). On April 11, 2015, he tried to get Defendant Williams's attention as she walked by his cell, but she did not stop (Id. at p. 4). The following morning, however, Moore was examined by Williams (Doc. 99-1 at pp. 1-2; Doc. 104 at p. 4).[1] Moore requested antibiotics, pain medication, and antibacterial ointment, but Williams told him she was just looking him over (Doc. 104 at p. 4). Williams then contacted Dr. Trost, who prescribed Bactrim, an antibiotic, for 10 days (Doc. 99-1 at p. 2). Moore was scheduled to see a doctor or nurse again on April 13, 2015, but Moore's medical records note that he went to yard instead (Id.). Moore disputes that he went to yard and claims he was in his cell suffering from MRSA (Doc. 104 at p. 4). The medical note indicates Moore was to be recalled the following day on the doctor call line “as priority.” (Doc. 99-1 at p. 2).

         On April 14, 2015, and April 15, 2015, Moore was scheduled to see the doctor, but was not seen due to a lack of time (Id. at 3). On April 16, 2015, at 3 a.m., Moore was seen by RN Hanna for his diabetes (Doc. 104 at p. 5). Nurse Hanna asked why Moore was not taking his antibiotics, and Moore told her that nobody had given him any medication for his MRSA infection (Id.). Nurse Hanna informed Moore that Williams made an entry in his medical records indicating he received antibiotics and refused a doctor's appointment to go to yard (Id.). The nurse gave Moore a card of sulfa to be taken twice a day for 10 days (Doc. 99-1 at p. 4). Later that day, Dr. Trost examined Moore and found that the abscess was well drained (Id. at p. 5). Dr. Trost also prescribed Septra DS to be taken twice a day for 10 days (Id.). The next day, April 17, 2015, Dr. Trost again saw Moore (Id.). Moore reported being in pain but feeling better (Id.). Dr. Trost prescribed ibuprofen 800 mg, gel shampoo, and hydrocerin lotion (Id.).

         Williams has moved for summary judgment on Moore's claims of deliberate indifference, noting that Moore received prompt medical care. Within one day of his request to see the nurse, Williams saw Moore, called the doctor to obtain antibiotics, and made appointments for Moore to get treatment. Accordingly, no reasonable jury would find that she was deliberately indifferent to Moore's medical needs.

         In response, Moore claims that when he saw Williams, he requested antibiotics, pain medication, and antibacterial ointment for his infection, but Williams told him he would have to ask the doctor for those things (Doc. 104). Moore asserts that Williams wrote in his medical chart that he had received an antibiotic when that was not actually the case. He also claims that Williams wrote that he skipped his doctor's appointment on April 13, 2015, in order to go to yard when actually he was in his cell suffering from a MRSA infection.

         The Report and Recommendation and Objection

         In her Report and Recommendation, Judge Daly found that the evidence does not support Moore's claims regarding Defendant Williams. While Moore claims Williams documented that he received antibiotics, the medical records only reflect that Dr. Trost prescribed the Bactrim DS, not that Moore received the medication. Additionally, the medical records do not indicate that Williams wrote the entry regarding Moore skipping his appointment because the handwriting is different. Importantly, Williams examined Moore the day after he first complained about his MRSA infection, she called the doctor, documented the order for oral antibiotics, and scheduled him to see the nurse practitioner the following day. There is no evidence Williams was responsible for any subsequent delays in Moore seeing a doctor or in receiving the antibiotics. And it is undisputed that Moore received the antibiotics within five days of his initial complaints to Williams. Accordingly, Judge Daly concluded that there is no evidence in the record that Williams was deliberately indifferent to Moore's MRSA infection.

         Moore filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation on October 22, 2019 (Doc. 110). Moore first objects on the grounds that Judge Daly characterized his claim as one for “delaying” medical treatment rather than “delaying and denying” medical treatment. He asserts that while Williams and another nurse, RN Hanna, both observed his MRSA symptoms and were aware of his pain and suffering, only RN Hanna provided him with the antibiotic prescribed by Dr. Trost. Moore also claims he requested pain medication from Williams but was denied any medication. RN Hanna, on the other hand, gave him sulfa and an institutional bag of hygiene supplies.

         Second, Moore objects on the grounds that Judge Daly improperly disregarded his Declaration in support of his response to summary judgment. Regardless of who wrote the entry in his medical records, Moore attested that he did not skip his doctor's appointment to go to yard. Thus, he argues, there is a genuine issue of material fact.

         Third, Moore objects on the grounds that Judge Daly's findings of fact are erroneous. He states that the record provides no support for the finding that he was seen by a registered nurse for his MRSA infection at 12:10 p.m. Rather, the record is merely a RN Note documenting his visit at 8:50 a.m., and it was written without him being present. Additionally, he was not seen the day following his complaint but rather two days after requesting to be examined for his MRSA infection. Moore also takes issue with Judge Daly's finding that Williams did not make the entry regarding his missing doctor appointment when Moore attested that RN Hanna told him Williams made that entry.

         Finally, Moore objects to Judge Daly's conclusion that Williams provided adequate medical care under the Eighth Amendment when he began receiving antibiotics ...


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.