Davies v. LeBlanc
| Decision Date | 08 July 2020 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-12575 SECTION: "E" (5) |
| Parties | A. J. DAVIES, Plaintiff v. JAMES LEBLANC, ET AL., Defendants |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana |
Before the Court is a motion to dismiss filed by Defendants Tracy Falgout, Stephanie Lamartiniere, Randy Lavespere, and Cynthia Park.1 For the following reasons, the motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is DENIED as to Counts 1, 2, and 3, and the Court's ruling on qualified immunity on those Counts is DEFERRED. The motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is GRANTED as to Count 4.
Plaintiff A.J. Davies currently is incarcerated at the Louisiana State Penitentiary ("LSP") in Angola, Louisiana.2 On April 28, 2017, Davies filed a complaint in federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging various individuals connected with LSP violated his constitutional right to appropriate medical care and his right to refuse medical treatment.3 Over the next year and a half, Davies filed three amended complaints in a pro se capacity.4 Davies then was appointed counsel and on November 27, 2019, with the assistance of counsel, filed what is designated as a Third Amended Complaint.5 On December 27, 2019, also with the assistance of counsel, Davies filed what is designated asa Fourth Amended Complaint.6 Defendants Park, Falgout, Lavespere, and Lamartiniere ("the State Defendants"), all sued only in their individual capacities, seek to dismiss this Fourth Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for its failure to state a claim for relief and based on qualified immunity.7
By at least March 2016, Davies began experiencing pain in his genital area and observed an area of hardness on or around the head of his penis.9 During an appointment that month at which he was seen by Nurse Park, Davies alerted Nurse Park to this pain and hardness in his genital area.10 Without a meaningful examination, Nurse Park prescribed Davies two weeks' worth of antibiotics.11 Davies took the antibiotics but saw no improvement.12
Two to three weeks after the March, 2016 appointment, Davies again saw Nurse Park who ignored his complaints and, without a meaningful examination, prescribed another course of pills.13 Davies took these pills as instructed but his condition did not improve.14 By April 2016, Davies began noticing blood in his urine.15 On April 22, 2016, Davies saw Nurse Park a third time and reported to her he was not seeing anyimprovement.16 Davies also expressed frustration that Nurse Park was not doing anything meaningful to investigate his condition.17 Nurse Park again ignored Davies' complaints, did not perform a meaningful examination, and prescribed Davies an antibiotic ointment.18 After using the ointment, Davies' condition continued to worsen, and he observed more hardness on the right side of his penis.19
On May 23, 2016, Davies completed a healthcare request form indicating he had been complaining of pain in his genital area for approximately three months but had not received any meaningful treatment.20 In response, an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) at LSP evaluated Davies on May 31, 2016.21 The EMT determined Davies did not need to be seen immediately and could wait for his already scheduled appointment at the LSP clinic at which "they would see what's what."22
On June 1, 2016, Davies was on "call out" from the LSP Treatment Center.23 Davies reported to the LSP Treatment Center but was not permitted to see a doctor.24 Instead, he was told to submit blood for testing at the lab.25 On June 2, 2016, Davies again sought treatment but was turned down for sick call because the officer in charge could not locate a sick call form.26 After leaving sick call, a warden noticed Davies was in considerable pain.27 Davies explained he had requested treatment but was told the sick call forms weremissing.28 The warden told Davies to return to sick call and put in an emergency request.29 Davies returned and requested emergency care for the pain in his genital region.30 An EMT reviewed Davies' emergency request and instructed him to sign the request form but took no further action.31 After Davies signed the request form, no medical provider at LSP responded.32
On June 6, 2016, Davies filed an emergency grievance with LSP that described his lack of adequate medical treatment.33 On June 21, 2016, he saw another EMT at LSP, who also failed take any action to treat Davies or obtain treatment for him in a timely manner.34 In response to Davies' June 21, 2016, request for treatment, another medical provider, without examining Davies, prescribed him another course of antibiotics.35
On July 15, 2016, Davies' emergency grievance was denied.36 On July 22, 2016, Davies appealed this denial, and his appeal also was denied.37 On July 23, 2016, Davies again went to the LSP Treatment Center to request treatment and, during this visit, he was scheduled an appointment to see a urology doctor at LSP.38 On July 25, 2016, Davies was seen by a medical provider at the LSU Urology Clinic at LSP.39 This provider noted Davies had multiple lesions on his penis and that the lesions had been present for the past six months.40 The provider did not give Davies a diagnosis, treatment, or treatment plan.41
On August 14, 2016, Davies declared himself a medical emergency and sought immediate treatment.42 A physician at LSP reviewed this request for treatment but did not evaluate Davies.43 Davies was told to go to sick call as needed.44 On September 2, 2016, "LSP personnel" told Davies he was being transported to University Medical Center in New Orleans (UMC) for a biopsy of his genitals.45 He was transported to UMC that same day.46 At all times, the State Defendants knew Davies could potentially undergo a penectomy (penis amputation) at UMC, but they never told him.47
At UMC, Davies was told he would undergo a biopsy and that a tissue sample would be taken.48 No medical provider discussed a potential penectomy with him.49 On September 3, 2016, after undergoing sedation, Davies awoke to discover approximately 75% of his penis had been amputated and a catheter had been installed at the base of his penis.50 Davies never received a formal diagnosis for his medical issues.51
On September 5, 2016, Davies saw a medical provider at LSP.52 The provider informed him "they had run into cancer" and that is why his penis had been amputated.53 This was the first time Davies was told he had cancer.54 On November 14, 2016, Davies filed a formal grievance based on the amputation of his penis without his consent.55 Davies' request for relief was denied, as was his appeal of the denial.56
Defendant Tracy Falgout, Deputy Warden of Operations at LSP, was responsible for protecting the constitutional rights of all persons held in LSP's custody.57 Defendant Stephanie Lamartiniere, an Assistant Warden for Health Services at LSP, exercised operational control over the Angola Treatment Center by making staffing, budget, and administrative decisions.58 Further, she was charged with creating, enforcing, and implementing policies to ensure the delivery of adequate health care to inmates.59 Defendant Randy Lavespere, the Medical Director of the Office of Health Services at LSP, exercised operational control over the Angola Treatment Center hospital by overseeing the delivery of medical treatment to inmates.60 Nurse Park was a medical provider responsible for the delivery of medical care to inmates at LSP.61
Davies brings four § 1983 claims against the State Defendants based on their alleged violations of his Eighth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights:62
The State Defendants bring the instant motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).67 They assert Davies has failed to state a claim on which relief may be granted against them. In addition, they raise the defense of qualified immunity on all claims.
The Court begins its analysis with Count 3—that the State Defendants violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment when they acted with deliberate indifference to Davies' serious medical needs. The Court then will consider Counts 1 and 2 against Defendants Lamartiniere, Falgout, and Lavespere (collectively referred to as "the Supervisory Defendants") for failing to establish adequate policies and practices at LSP and for failure to supervise their subordinates. Finally, the Court will consider Count 4—that the State Defendants violated Davies' right to refuse medical treatment.68
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), a district court may dismiss a complaint, or any part of it, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted if the plaintiff has not set forth factual allegations in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief.69 "To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'"70 "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged."71 However, the court does...
To continue reading
Request your trial