Carroll v. Lancaster Cnty.

Decision Date14 March 2018
Docket NumberCIVIL ACTION NO. 16–1580
Citation301 F.Supp.3d 486
Parties James CARROLL and Mary Carroll, as Co–Administrators of the Estate of Patrick J. Kanney, Plaintiffs v. LANCASTER COUNTY, et al., Defendants
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Alan E. Denenberg, Abramson & Denenberg, Philadelphia, PA, for Plaintiffs.

David J. MacMain, Nicole Freiler, The MacMain Law Group LLC, Malvern, PA, Robert P. Didomenicis, Holsten & Associates, Media, PA, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM

Henry S. Perkin, M.J.

This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendants, William Miller and Tyler Phillips filed on November 10, 2017, Defendants Lancaster County, Warden Dennis Molyneaux, and Sergeant Maldonado's Motion for Summary Judgment filed on November 16, 2017, and the Motion of PrimeCare Medical Defendants for Summary Judgment filed on November 16, 2017. On March 7, 2018, the parties filed a stipulation dismissing all claims against Defendant Enos Martin, M.D. See Dkt. No. 98. Having reviewed and considered the contentions of the parties, the Court is prepared to rule on the pending motions for summary judgment.1

I. BACKGROUND

Based upon the record papers, exhibits, depositions, and the parties' statements of facts, the pertinent facts to this Court's determination are as follows:

Plaintiffs James Carroll and Mary Carroll ("Plaintiffs") are the parents of Patrick J. Kanney ("Kanney"). Compl. ¶ 5. On April 18, 2014, Kanney was arrested in Ephrata, Lancaster County for theft, loitering, and prowling. Id. ¶ 19. Kanney could not post bail and was taken to Lancaster County Prison ("LCP") to be held as a pretrial detainee. Id. ¶ 20. Upon being committed to LCP, Kanney underwent intake screenings and health assessments. LCP Correctional Officer Joshua Zielinski ("Officer Zielinski") performed the initial intake screening of Kanney. Dkt. 58, Ex. F, Zielinski Dep., pp. 13–16. During the intake screening, Kanney disclosed to Officer Zielinski that he was "dope sick" and used a bundle a day for three months straight. Id. at 20–22. Officer Zielinski also performed a strip search of Kanney, which was documented by Officer Carl Koltz. Id. at 40–42; Dkt. 58, Ex. G, Koltz Dep., pp. 14–18. A copy of the intake forms were given to the medical department, PrimeCare. Dkt. 58, Ex. G, Koltz Dep., p. 31. Jade Fritsch, MA, a PrimeCare employee, conducted a "rapid screen" of Kanney prior to his full medical intake. Dkt. 58, Ex. K, Fritsch Dep., pp. 23–29. The "rapid screen" indicated that Kanney brought two medications into the prison with him, that his pulse was elevated, and that he would be withdrawing from heroin and Xanax, and that he had last used 5 bags of heroin that morning. Id. at 30–36.

Shortly thereafter, Jaycees Candelario electronically completed several forms including a Mental Health Screen for Men, a Receiving Screening and Health Assessment Form, and an Intake Suicide Screen. Dkt. 58, Ex. H, Candelario Dep., pp. 17–19. The Intake Suicide Screening page stated that "[i]f the patient scores 8 or more, a Suicide Watch will be initiated." Dkt. 58, Ex. Y, p. 1. Kanney answered yes to five questions and a Suicide Watch was not automatically initiated. Id. at 1–2. On the Receiving Screening and Health Assessment Form, Kanney indicated that he was addicted to heroin and Xanax and used both the day before entering LCP. Id. at 4. Kanney also indicated that he had not previously tried to commit suicide and that he was not presently suicidal. Id. at 6. On the Mental Health Screen for Men, Kanney answered "yes" to nine of twelve questions. Id. at 11. According to the Mental Health Screen for Men, if a detainee answered "yes" to 6 or more questions, then the detainee should be referred for further mental health evaluation. Id. In the comments section of Kanney's Mental Health Screen for Men, Ms. Candelario indicated that Kanney should be "re evaluate[d]." Id.

Initially, Kristen Zablocki, RN, a PrimeCare employee, issued DOJ Orders for Kanney and placed him on 30 Minute Detox Watch. Dkt. 58, Ex. Z, DOJ Orders, p.1. DOJ Orders refer to medical restrictions on which inmates are placed. Dkt. 57, Ex. G, Kotz Dep., p. 46. Kanney was also placed on work, gym, and yard restrictions and corrections staff were told to assign him a low bunk. Id. Shortly thereafter, and following her exam of Kanney on April 19, 2014, Ms. Candelario updated his DOJ Orders to indicate that the restrictions were to remain in place until a Doctor or Physician Assistant cleared Kanney. Id. at 3.

Katherine ("Katie") Neimer reviewed the intake forms completed by Ms. Candelario. Dkt. 75, Ex. J, Neimer Dep., p. 19. She agreed with Ms. Candelario's completion of the forms. Id. Ms. Neimer called for orders of Kanney's medicines, including Vistaril and Wellbutrin. Id. At the time of her deposition, Ms. Neimer did not recall noticing any inconsistencies between the responses given by Kanney and recorded by Ms. Candelario. Id. at 28. She relied on the information that Ms. Candelario completed to be accurate. Id. at 44.

On April 21, 2014, PrimeCare Medical Staff received a Sick Call Request from Kanney. Dkt. 58, Ex. EE, p.1. On the handwritten form, Kanney indicated that he was hearing strange voices and was overly stressed out. Id. In response to his Sick Call Request, Bonnie Bair, a PrimeCare Mental Health Caseworker, conducted an assessment of Kanney that morning. Dkt. 58, Ex. I, Bair Dep., pp. 22–27. Ms. Bair asked Kanney numerous questions about his symptoms and mental health history. Id. at 41–53. Following her examination, Ms. Bair recommended that sick call requests should be completed as needed. Id. at. 53–54. Ms. Bair indicated that Kanney's mood was neutral and that he denied suicidal ideation. Id. at 56–58. Ms. Bair also recommended that Kanney should be evaluated by a psychiatrist in one week. Id. at 58–59.

On April 21, 2014, Officer William Miller was asked to work a mandatory overtime shift. Dkt. 58, Ex. A, Miller Dep., pp. 28–30. Officer Miller asked to be assigned to the medical unit for this overtime shift. Id. at 32–33. Officer Miller was given a list of approximately eleven inmates, including Kanney, to pick up and bring back to the medical unit. Id. at. 40–41; Dkt. 50, Ex. MP5. Upon returning to the medical unit, the inmates took seats in the waiting area and Officer Miller positioned himself at the front desk. Id. at 43–44; Dkt. 50, Ex. MP5. Officer Miller did not have any interaction with Kanney prior to April 21, 2014. Id. at 43. Several minutes after arriving in the medical unit, Kanney got up to use the restroom for the first time. Dkt. 50, Ex. MP5. Officer Miller heard Kanney state that his stomach was hurting and that he needed to relieve himself. Dkt. 58, Ex. A, Miller Dep., pp. 50–51. After approximately five minutes, Kanney exited the restroom, adjusted his pants, and returned to his seat. Dkt. 50, Ex. MP5. Two minutes later, Kanney stood up and entered the restroom for the second time. Id. After Kanney had been in the restroom for ten minutes, Officer Miller knocked on the restroom door and then returned to the desk after hearing what he believed to be feet shuffling. Id.; Dkt. 58, Ex. A, Miller Dep., pp.58–59.

Shortly thereafter, Officer Tyler Phillips walked to the front of the medical unit and spoke to Officer Miller. Dkt. 50, Ex. MP5; Dkt. 58, Ex. B, Phillips Dep., pp. 31–32. Then, Officer Phillips walked over to the restroom and listened through the door; he did not hear anything. Id.; Dkt. 58, Phillips Dep., pp. 38–39. Three minutes later, Officer Phillips headed to the back of the medical unit and Officer Miller knocked on the restroom door for a second time and remained there for roughly twenty seconds before he returned to the front desk. Id. Officer Miller did not hear anything from inside the restroom. Dkt. 58, Ex. A, Miller Dep., pp. 62–63. Officer Phillips returned to the front desk and spoke briefly with Officer Miller before heading to the back of the unit again. Dkt. 58, Ex. B, Phillips Dep., pp. 40–41. Officer Miller called for his supervisor, Sergeant John Maldonado, to come to the medical unit and unlock the restroom door. Dkt. 50, Ex. MP5; Dkt. 58, Ex. A, Miller Dep., p. 63; Dkt. 58, Ex. C, Maldonado Dep., pp. 43–45. Approximately one minute later, Officer Phillips instructed the other inmates sitting near the door to move away. Dkt. 50, Ex. MP5. Officer Miller knocked on the restroom door a third time. Id. Sergeant Maldonado entered the medical unit, knocked on the restroom door, waited a few seconds, and then unlocked it. Id.; Dkt. 58, Ex. A, Miller Dep., pp. 65–66; Dkt. 58, Ex. C, Maldonado Dep., p.47. Sergeant Maldonado and Officer Miller observed Kanney hanging by his shirt from a hook on the back of the restroom door and immediately called for medical assistance. Dkt. 58, Ex. A, Miller Dep., pp. 65–67; Dkt. 58, Ex. C, Maldonado Dep., pp. 52–54. Approximately eighteen minutes elapsed from the moment Kanney entered the restroom for the second time and the moment that Sergeant Maldonado unlocked the restroom door. Dkt. 50, Ex. MP5.

Various medical personnel rendered aid to Kanney until the paramedics and emergency medical technicians arrived on scene. Id.; Dkt. 58, Ex. C, Maldonado Dep. p. 55; Dkt. 58, Ex. O, p. 3. Kanney was transported to Lancaster General Hospital, where he was resuscitated. Dkt. 58, Ex. O, p. 4; Dkt. 58, Ex. W, Postmortem Rep., p. 1. Kanney's family was notified. After doctors determined that Kanney had sustained a brain injury which rendered him ventilator dependent, Kanney's family decided to withdraw life sustaining measures. Dkt. 58, Ex. W, Postmortem Rep., p. 1. Kanney died on April 23, 2014. Id. Following an autopsy, Lancaster County Forensic Pathologist Dr. Wayne K. Ross opined that Kanney's cause of death was Passive Hanging and the manner of death was Suicide. Id. at 6.

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Pursuant to Rule 56(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment is proper ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Moore v. Wetzel
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania
    • March 6, 2019
    ...represent official policy, inflicts the injury...the government as an entity is responsible under § 1983." Id.Carroll v. Lancaster Cty., 301 F. Supp. 3d 486, 504 (E.D. Pa. 2018). Likewise, " '[a] private corporation contracted by a prison to provide health care for inmates cannot be held li......
  • Mammen v. Thomas Jefferson Univ.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • March 5, 2021
    ...theory in responding to Defendants’ Motion, the Court finds that Mammen has abandoned this theory. See, e.g. , Carroll v. Lancaster Cty. , 301 F. Supp.3d 486, 512 (E.D. Pa. 2018) (finding claim abandoned where not addressed in opposition brief and granting summary judgment).5 When asked dur......
  • Lewis ex rel. Lewis v. Cnty. of Northumberland
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania
    • September 30, 2018
    ...has acted with a "reckless or callous disregard of, or indifference to, the rights and safety of others." Carroll v. Lancaster Cty., 301 F. Supp. 3d 486, 514-15 (E.D. Pa. 2018) (citations omitted). "Whether conduct rises to that level is for the jury to decide." Id.; Woolfolk v. Duncan, 872......
  • Philmon v. Lincoln Univ.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • January 19, 2023
    ...6, 2005); Evans v. Nine West Grp., Inc., No. 00-4850, 2002 WL 550477, at *4 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 15, 2002); and Carroll v. Lancaster Cty., 301 F.Supp.3d 486, 499, 511 (E.D. Pa. 2018)). However, because the Third Circuit has cautioned that a plaintiff's failure to respond to a summary judgment mot......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT