Lynn v. Willnauer
| Decision Date | 13 April 2021 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 5:19-cv-03117-HLT |
| Parties | PATRICK C. LYNN, Plaintiff, v. CHARLIE WILLNAUER, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Kansas |
Plaintiff, Patrick C. Lynn, brings this pro se prisoner civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is incarcerated at the Lansing Correctional Facility in Lansing, Kansas ("LCF"). The Court granted Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 28.) This matter is before the Court for screening Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint ("FAC") pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Plaintiff initiated this case by filing his original Complaint (Doc. 1) on July 2, 2019, alleging that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury. Plaintiff's Complaint was not on the court-approved form as required by D. Kan. Rule 9.1. Plaintiff included with his Complaint a letter to the Clerk stating that:
. . . LCF prison officials unlawfully & corruptly refuse to provide any free court forms for prisoner petitions, & as such I humbly here request you please send me 10 § 1983 lawsuit forms & 5 IFP Application forms so I can re-submit this suit on the required form & also submit additional § 1983 separate suits for ongoing rabid constitutional abuses by LCF prison officials.
(Doc. 1-2.) On July 3, 2019, the Clerk mailed Plaintiff ten civil rights complaint forms and five forms for seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis. On that same date, the Court entered a Notice of Deficiency (Doc. 2) advising Plaintiff that his Complaint was not upon court-approved forms and granting him until August 2, 2019, in which to correct the deficiency.
On July 16, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for orders (Doc. 6), indicating that "he is in the process of drafting his First Amended Complaint utilizing the required form." (Doc. 6, at 1.) On July 29, 2019, Plaintiff requested an additional thirty days to submit his amended complaint. (Doc. 8, at 3.)
On August 1, 2019, the Court entered an order denying Plaintiff's motion for filing fee waiver based on imminent dangers of serious physical injury and denied his motion to proceed in forma pauperis in light of his status as a three-strikes litigant under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (Doc. 10.) The Court also granted Plaintiff until August 19, 2019, to submit the filing fee. Id. Plaintiff filed a notice of interlocutory appeal on August 8, 2019, and the Court dismissed this case for failure to submit the filing fee on August 21, 2019. (Doc. 18.) On August 27, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal. (Doc. 20.) On September 3, 2020, the Court received the mandate from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, finding that Plaintiff was in imminent danger at the time of filing, vacating this Court's orders denying Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing this action, and remanding the case to this Court for consideration of his claims in the first instance. (Doc. 27.)
On September 8, 2020, the Court entered an Order granting Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and granting Plaintiff an extension of time until October 5, 2020, to submit his amended complaint on court-approved forms. (Doc. 28.) On September 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking a sixty-day stay of all proceedings and deadlines in this case.(Doc. 29.) The Court granted the motion to the extent that the Court granted Plaintiff a thirty-day extension of time to submit his amended complaint, granting him until November 5, 2020, in which to submit his amended complaint on court-approved forms. (Doc. 30.) On October 29, 2020, Plaintiff filed a "Motion for Final 10 Days' Time Extension to File Amended Complaint" (Doc. 32). On October 20, 2020, the Court entered an order granting the extension and noting that "[t]he Court is not inclined to grant any further extensions." (Doc. 33.) The order further noted Plaintiff's filing restrictions and provided that "the Court is not inclined to authorize any additional filings from Plaintiff until Plaintiff has filed his amended complaint and the complaint has survived the Court's screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A."1 Id. Plaintiff was granted until November 16, 2020, in which to submit his amended complaint on court-approved forms. Id. On November 16, 2020—the due date for filing his amended complaint—Plaintiff filed a motion seeking a sixty-day stay of the case. (Doc. 36.) The Court granted Plaintiff a sixty-day extension of time to submit his amended complaint, but denied the other relief requested in the motion. (Doc. 37.) The Court granted Plaintiff until January 15, 2021, to submit his amended complaint on court-approved forms. Id.
On December 9, 2020, this case was reassigned to the undersigned for all further proceedings. (Doc. 39.) On December 31, 2020, Plaintiff submitted another proposed filing to the Court, which was not an amended complaint on a court-approved form. The Court denied the proposed filing but granted Plaintiff until February 8, 2021, to submit a proper amended complaint on a court-approved form. (Doc. 40.) Plaintiff finally submitted his FAC on February 8, 2021.(Doc. 43.)2 The Court will now screen Plaintiff's FAC pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Plaintiff alleges in his FAC that he had a quadruple heart bypass operation on July 3, 2014, and was advised by the heart surgeon that the entire bottom half of his heart is dead muscle. Plaintiff has suffered multiple heart attacks and hospitalizations every year since the heart surgery. Plaintiff, as well as multiple prison medical staff have been advised by doctors and cardiologists that Plaintiff's heart condition cannot be remedied by any further surgery or stents, and the only thing keeping him alive is the stack of heart medications he is prescribed to take daily and the nitro vial he keeps with him. Plaintiff has been consistently told by multiple cardiologists from the original heart surgeon to every cardiologist since then—which Plaintiff claims is nearly two dozen—that undergoing an EKG will never test normal and that the "gold standard" for Plaintiff's individual condition is to test Plaintiff's blood troponin enzyme level because an elevated level signifies serious damage to the heart muscle.
Plaintiff alleges that the troponin enzyme level range in a healthy person is zero to 0.07 ng/ml (nanograms per milliliter). In 2018, LCF Dr. Ellis Williams had Plaintiff's troponin base level taken during a thirty-day calm period and it was determined to be 0.002. In August 2019, Plaintiff's base troponin level was again tested by Dr. Williams and determined to be at 0.001 during a thirty-day calm period.
Plaintiff was transferred to LCF on May 23, 2019. He alleges that on May 25, 2019, he suffered severe heart attack symptoms and was taken to the LCF clinic E/R and was briefly seenby RN Melissa. LPN Sinclair took Plaintiff's blood pressure, which was elevated. Plaintiff alleges that they left him for 45 minutes and "deliberately refused to enact the established 'Corizon chest pains protocol' which mandates [an] EKG, starting an IV, administering aspirin to chew up, & faxing the EKG graph to [the] 'on call' cardiologist & contacting the 'on call' Corizon physician for instructions & whether or not to take a Traponin [sic] blood sample & test it stat." (Doc. 43-3, at 9.) Plaintiff alleges that because the nurses refused to attend to his condition, Lt. Lee contacted Capt. Gallagher and she came on the scene and then caused RN Tom to assess Plaintiff. RN Tom then enacted the chest pains protocol and was instructed to take a troponin sample. Plaintiff was returned to his cell to await the result, which took over five hours even though the hospital lab was only three miles away.
Plaintiff's troponin sample came back at 0.116 ng/ml, and Dr. Monir directed Plaintiff to be rushed to the nearest hospital. Plaintiff was taken to St. John's Hospital in a KDOC car with two escorts. Plaintiff alleges that he was denied pain medication before his transfer to the hospital, and that he had suffered with immense heart spasms, difficulty breathing, and sharp pains in his jaw, left arm and neck for nearly eight hours. At the hospital, Plaintiff was injected multiple times with morphine and fentanyl, was placed in the ICU for three to four days, and was then returned to LCF.
Plaintiff alleges that despite his complaints, as well as RN Tom's write-up on the two nurses involved, nothing was done to hold the nurses accountable by HSA McCullough, staff at LCF or Corizon medical staff.
Plaintiff alleges that on June 22, 2019, he suffered another heart attack and was taken to the LCF Clinic E/R and received the chest pains protocol by RN Laura Gardner. She reportedPlaintiff's condition to the on-call physician, Dr. Monir, and he ordered a troponin test. The test came back in about an hour at .0135, and Dr. Monir ordered Plaintiff transferred by ambulance to KU Medical Center. The EMS staff transporting Plaintiff injected him with fentanyl. Plaintiff was admitted for four days, was treated with pain medication every four hours, and was then returned to LCF on June 25, 2019.
Upon his return to LCF, Plaintiff was placed in segregation, but was returned to the clinic E/R a few hours later on another chest pains medical emergency. Plaintiff was assessed by Nurses Layton and Gunter, who followed the chest pains protocol and took a troponin sample that came back at 0.116. APRN Kaur and Dr. Lewis-Harris readmitted Plaintiff to the Infirmary and placed him on a schedule to have a troponin test every twelve hours. Plaintiff alleges that he was denied pain medication despite his symptoms. Plaintiff alleges that his next troponin test came back at 0.117, yet he was discharged and returned to segregation on June 26, 2019, while still suffering heart attack symptoms.
Plaintiff...
To continue reading
Request your trial