Adell v. Hepp, Case No. 14-CV-1277-JPS
| Decision Date | 02 November 2015 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 14-CV-1277-JPS |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Wisconsin |
| Parties | MARK ANTHONY ADELL, Plaintiff, v. RANDALL HEPP, DR. CHARLES LARSEN, JODY DEROSA, and HOLLY MEIER, Defendants. |
In this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff Mark Anthony Adell ("Adell"), a state prisoner, claims that the defendants violated his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights by failing to afford him sufficient privacy during his medical appointments in March and April of 2014. (Docket #1). Though the Court's screening order in this matter did not find that Adell stated a claim for First Amendment retaliation (Docket #9), Adell argued in support of that claim in his response to the defendants' motions for summary judgment. (Docket #23 at 18-20). Thus, Adell's First Amendment claim is not properly before the Court from a procedural standpoint; but, the Court will nonetheless address the merits of Adell's First Amendment claim, as the defendants have responded to it in their reply. (Docket #27).
Presently before the Court are two motions: (1) Adell's Motion to Supplement the Complaint (Docket #17); and (2) the defendants' motion for summary judgment on Adell's First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment claims (Docket #19). For the reasons detailed herein, the defendants' motion will be granted, thereby rendering Adell's motion moot, and this action will be dismissed.
1. BACKGROUND1
In short, Adell alleges that Dr. Charles Larson2 ("Larson") violated his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights by allowing a security guard to stand outside, or in the vicinity, of his medical exam room during two appointments in the Health Services Unit ("HSU"). (See generally Docket #1, #23). Adell alleges that Larson requested additional security in order to retaliate against him for filing grievances against medical staff. (See generally Docket #23). Moreover, Adell alleges that Holly Meier, Jody DeRosa, and Randall Hepp are liable for the same constitutional violations in light of their varying degrees of knowledge, participation, and failure to intervene in Adell's situation.3 (Docket #23 at 21).
1.1 The Parties
Adell is currently incarcerated at Fox Lake Correctional Institution ("FLCI") and has been since March 11, 2014. (Docket #24 ¶ 2). Prior to FLCI, Adell was incarcerated at Oshkosh Correctional Institution ("OSCI") fromapproximately October of 2010 until March of 2014. (Docket #24 ¶ 2). Adell has an extensive medical history and currently suffers from a number of health conditions related to iron deficiency, anemia, a hiatal hernia, prior drug and alcohol abuse, and celiac's disease.4 (Docket #21 ¶ 12). Adell transferred to FLCI due to his inability to "get along" with the staff at OSCI.5 (Docket #21 ¶ 11). Though Adell alleges that he has never acted in "defiance" towards prison staff (Docket #23 at 16, 18), Adell's medical records indicate that he has a history of argumentative and uncooperative behavior towardsmedical personnel.6 (Docket #22 Ex. 1 at 6-7, 10-15). He likewise has a pattern of refusing medical treatment. (Docket #21 ¶ 40). Adell states that he has no history of being "cited" for violent behavior (Docket #23 at 2), and the defendants do not dispute this.
FLCI is a medium security institution located in Fox Lake, Wisconsin. (Docket #21 ¶ 1). The defendants are employed at FLCI. (Docket #21 ¶¶ 1, 26, 42; Docket #20 at 1-2). Larson is a physician; Holly Meier ("Meier") is the HSU manager; Jody DeRosa ("DeRosa") is the Bureau of Health Services ("BHS") Nursing Coordinator; and Randall Hepp ("Hepp") is the Warden. (Docket #21 ¶¶ 1, 26, 42; Docket #20 at 1-2).
FLCI does not maintain a specific, written policy related to the presence of security staff during medical appointments. (Docket #21 ¶ 5). However, according to the defendants, security staff are present throughout the institution at any given moment and may be called upon by any staff person for any reason, including medical staff. (Docket #21 ¶ 5). This is particularly true when staff feel safety or security are a concern. (Docket #22 ¶¶ 7-10).
Upon Adell's arrival to FLCI, an initial medical screening indicated that Adell had not had a physical exam since April 6, 2004. (Docket #21 ¶ 12).That same day, Adell submitted a Health Services Request ("HSR") for an appointment with a physician to discuss his care plan. (Docket #21 ¶ 15). Prison staff received the HSR on March 13, 2014, and scheduled Adell to see a physician. (Docket #21 ¶ 15).
Adell filed another HSR on March 15, 2014, this time to request an intake screening. (Docket #21 ¶ 16). Prison staff received Adell's second HSR on March 17, 2014 (Docket #21 ¶ 16), and reminded Adell that he was scheduled to see a physician.7 (Docket #21 ¶ 16).
On March 18, 2014, Adell followed up with a letter to the HSU. (Docket #21 ¶ 17). He stated that he hoped that the "prior neglect" that he had received at OSCI would not continue and that he would like to have an appointment with an physician "ASAP." (Docket #21 ¶ 17). Later that day, Adell refused a weight check. (Docket #21 ¶ 18). In response, Adell wrote a second letter to the HSU asking medical staff not to (Docket #21 ¶ 20).
Adell's first appointment with a physician at FLCI was scheduled for March 25, 2014. (Docket #21 ¶ 21). According to Adell's medical records andLarson's testimony, upon arrival Adell refused to cooperate with the medical assistant for a weight check.8 (Docket #21 ¶ 21).
When Adell approached the medical exam room, he noticed a guard posted outside the door. (Docket #23 ¶ 2). Larson admits that he had asked for a security guard to stand outside the exam room door during this appointment with Adell. (Docket #21 ¶ 22). However, the parties dispute the reason why Larson made this request. On the one hand, Larson states in his declaration that he requested security presence for two reasons: (1) Adell's "disruptive and disrespectful behavior" on that day (Docket #22 ¶ 23); and (2) Adell's behavioral history as reflected in his medical file. (Docket #21 ¶ 24; Docket #22 ¶ 25). These facts made Larson believe that a security presence was necessary to ensure his safety and the safety of other HSU staff. (Docket #21 ¶ 24; Docket #22 ¶ 25). Adell, on the other hand, claims that the guard was present to serve as a "witness" and to retaliate against, intimidate, and harass him "for lodging legitimate complaints against the defendants and their DOC medical system." (Docket #23 at 17, 19). Adell presents no evidence of having complained of FLCI's medical services prior to his March 23, 2014 appointment. In his brief, however, he frequently alludes to having complained about medical treatment at OSCI. (See, e.g., Docket #23 at 15).
Per Larson's request, a security officer stood in the hallway outside the exam room during Adell's first appointment. (Docket #21 ¶ 23). Thedefendants admit that the officer was close enough to the exam room to see the events occurring inside. (Docket #21 ¶ 23). But, they also state that the guard would have likely had difficulty hearing conversations going on in the exam room at normal conversation volume, though would have heard shouting and loud noises. (Docket #21 ¶ 23). Adell alleges that the security guard was present "long enough to observe and overhear medical communications." (Docket #23 at 17). When Adell noticed the security guard outside the examination room door, he ended the appointment. (Docket #21 ¶ 25).
That same day, Adell wrote a letter to Meier complaining about this alleged breach of confidentiality. (Docket #21 ¶ 26). Meier responded two days later stating that Adell had been transferred to FLCI "due to the concern that [he] did not adhere to the care plans at OSCI and did not work with [his] health providers." (Docket #21 ¶ 26). In addition, she indicated that Adell's next appointment would be set for April 2, 2014, wherein she would "be available...so that your health concerns are addressed." (Docket #21 ¶ 26).
When Adell arrived for his April 2, 2014 appointment, he again refused his weight check and appeared "angry [and] upset." (Docket #21 ¶ 28). It is unclear whether a security guard was stationed outside the door of the exam room (Docket #23 at 6), or whether a guard was making rounds in the hallways (Docket #21 ¶ 29).9
According to Larson, Adell presented at the April 2, 2014 appointment as "hostile, agitated, and argumentative." (Docket #21 ¶ 32). Adell inquiredas to why Larson needed to have other staff available during the appointment. (Docket #21 ¶¶ 32-34). Larson responded that Adell could "have as much privacy as his behavior would allow," and that until Larson was comfortable being in an exam room alone with Adell, at least one other HSU staff or security officer would be present. (Docket #21 ¶ 33). At some point during this exchange, Larson alleges that Adell became upset about the security guard who was, according to the defendants, making rounds in the hallway, and, according to Adell, posted at the door. (Docket #21 ¶ 36; Docket #23 at 6). Mid-conversation, Adell terminated the appointment. (Docket #21 ¶ 34). Because Adell terminated the appointment, Larson did not conduct an evaluation and did not provide care plan recommendations to Adell. (Docket #21 ¶ 37).
To continue reading
Request your trial