Baez v. Falor
Decision Date | 24 September 2012 |
Docket Number | Civil Action No. 09 - 1149,ECF No. 234,ECF No. 193,ECF No. 233 |
Parties | ORLANDO BAEZ, Plaintiff, v. STANLEY FALOR, et al., Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania |
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 193), Plaintiff's Motion for Emergency Medical Care (ECF No. 233), and Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (ECF No. 234). For the reasons that follow, Defendants' Motion will be granted and Plaintiff's Motions will be denied.
Plaintiff, Orlando Baez, a capital inmate presently incarcerated at the State Correctional Institution at Greene ("SCI-Greene") located in Waynesburg, Pennsylvania, commenced this civil action pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The original complaint was filed on November 7, 2006 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and alleged violations of the Fourteenth and Eighth Amendments regarding the medical treatment that Plaintiff was provided while he was incarcerated at the State Correctional Institution at Graterford ("SCI-Graterford") and SCI-Greene. (ECF No. 6.) On January 25, 2007, prison officials from SCI-Greene filed a motion to transfer claims against them to theWestern District of Pennsylvania. (ECF No. 14.) The Eastern District of Pennsylvania ordered a hearing on a rule to show cause as to why Plaintiff's claims against all Defendants associated with SCI-Greene should not be severed and transferred. (ECF No. 31.) Counsel was appointed for Plaintiff and the court deferred decision on transfer of claims against SCI-Greene Defendants to provide Plaintiff an opportunity to file a counseled response. (ECF Nos. 37, 38.)
On October 17, 2007, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that he be transferred to SCI-Graterford. (ECF No. 40). The court denied the motion to transfer without prejudice and gave Plaintiff leave to file a counseled amended complaint. (ECF No. 53.) On March 24, 2008, Plaintiff filed a motion for an immediate preliminary injunction relating to the medical care he was receiving at SCI-Greene. (ECF No. 61.) On May 6 and 7, 2008, the court held evidentiary hearings on Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction where Plaintiff, Dr. Byunghak Jin, and Dr. Stanley Falor testified. (ECF Nos. 69, 70, 72, 73.) After the evidentiary hearings, the parties took the deposition of Dr. Seaman and provided a transcript to the court. In June 2008, the parties submitted proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. (ECF Nos. 74, 75.)
On July 22, 2008, Plaintiff, through counsel, filed an Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 77.) After an August 2008 teledermatology consult with Dr. Stephen Schleicher, Plaintiff requested that the court reopen the record for injunction to admit both Dr. Schleicher's report and Plaintiff's letter complaining about the consult. The court granted Plaintiff's request and ordered the record opened for supplementary evidentiary submissions to be followed by supplementary briefing by all parties. (ECF No. 89.) On May 4, 2009, the Honorable Norma Shapiro denied Plaintiff's request for preliminary injunctive relief finding that Plaintiff was receiving treatment in excess of the minimum required by the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 98.) On July 23, 2009, Plaintiff's claims arising from his incarceration at SCI-Greene were transferred to this Court.(ECF No. 108.) Specifically, Plaintiff's claims against the following Defendants were transferred: Louis Folino, Superintendent of SCI-Greene ("Folino"); Dr. Stanley Falor ("Dr. Falor");1 Diane Manson, CHCA ("Manson");2 Shirley Hickman, PA-C ("Hickman"); Dr. Abimbola Talabi ("Dr. Talabi"); Sharon Burks, Chief Grievance Appeals Officer ("Burks"); Dr. Byunghak Jin ("Dr. Jin"); Debra Gress, CRNP ("Gress"); Michelle Howard-Diggs, PA-C ("Diggs"); and Prison Health Services ("PHS").3 (ECF Nos. 108, 111.)
Defendants Folino and Burks filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (ECF No. 122), which this Court granted on November 8, 2011 (ECF No. 219). The remaining Defendants, excluding Defendant Mason, filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on September 6, 2011. (ECF No. 193.) A Brief in support of the Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 206) and Concise Statement of Material Facts (ECF No. 204) with Appendix (ECF No. 205) were filed on September 28, 2011. A Supplemental Appendix (ECF No. 209) was filed on October 12, 2011 and a Supplement to the Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 216) was filed on October 29, 2011. Plaintiff filed an Appendix in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on January 20, 2012. (ECF No. 220.) Defendants elected to file a Reply Brief (ECF No. 227) and Plaintiff filed a Sur-Reply Brief on June 6, 2012 (ECF No. 232). The Motion for Summary Judgment is now ripe for review.
Relevant to this Court's review of the pending Motion for Summary Judgment are the following Findings of Fact made by Judge Shapiro on May 4, 2009, following hearings and submission of evidence in regards to Plaintiff's motion for injunctive relief filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
To continue reading
Request your trial