Reed v. Obi-Okoye

• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
• Docket Number: 2:18-CV-00105-JM-JTR
• Decision Date: 18 February 2022
• Citation: Reed v. Obi-Okoye, 2:18-CV-00105-JM-JTR (E.D. Ark. Feb 18, 2022)
• Parties: CHRISTOPHER MARZETT REED PLAINTIFF v. NWANNEM OBI-OKOYE, M.D., Health Services Unit, Forrest City Medium, et al., DEFENDANTS

1

CHRISTOPHER MARZETT REED PLAINTIFF v. NWANNEM OBI-OKOYE, M.D., Health Services Unit, Forrest City Medium, et al., DEFENDANTS

No. 2:18-CV-00105-JM-JTR

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Delta Division

February 18, 2022

RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

The following Recommended Disposition ("Recommendation") has been sent to United States District Judge James M. Moody, Jr. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of fact.

I. Introduction

Plaintiff Christopher Marzett Reed ("Reed"), formerly a prisoner in the Federal Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") ^[1] filed this pro se action alleging that eighteen named Defendants^[2] and an unspecified number of "Doe Defendants" provided inadequate medical care and racially discriminated against him while he was a prisoner in the Federal Correctional Institution-Medium located in Forrest City, Arkansas ("FCI-FC"). Doc. 2.

Reed alleges that between 2014 and 2017, he suffered from a skin condition that was improperly diagnosed and inadequately treated by both medical personnel in the FCI-FC Health Services Unit, and a BOP dermatologist who assessed and treated him remotely by "teledermatology." During this time, the rash spread to Reed's chest, groin, abdomen, legs and arms, developing into painful, pus-filled lesions and open sores. Doc. 2 at 3, 11-19. He alleges he eventually received proper treatment from an "outside" dermatologist. However, FCI-FC medical staff later refused to provide the medication prescribed by the dermatologist, which caused the rash to spread into his ears, throat and eyes. Id. at 13, 19-20.

Reed alleges that, through the BOP's administrative grievance process, supervisors knew about the inadequate medical care provided to him by staff medical providers, but failed and refused to take any corrective action. Id. at 23-27, 53-55, 58-67.

Reed alleges Defendants' inadequate medical care was "invidiously, racially motivated" because he is black. He alleges that similarly situated non-black inmates timely received outside medical specialist appointments and the medications prescribed by the specialists.^[3] Id. at 7-9, 14-15, 49, 51-52 & 70.

Reed alleges his unconstitutional care resulted in permanent scars covering his entire body. Id. at 97-98. He seeks $10 million in compensatory and punitive damages for permanent physical scarring, loss of vision, humiliation, and emotional and psychological trauma. Id. at 14-15, 70.

A. Claims

After screening Reed's Complaint, identifying "Doe Defendants," and addressing Motions to Dismiss, Reed is currently pursuing:

1. Bivens^[4] claims for:

(a) inadequate medical care claim provided by Defendant Andrew Manos, P.A. ("Manos"); (b) inadequate medical care claim provided by Defendants Nwannem Obi-Okoye, M.D. ("Dr. Obi-Okoye"), and Shelia Woodard, M.D. ("Dr. Woodard");

(c) inadequate medical care and a corrective inaction claim against separate Defendants Jillian Harris ("Harris"), Michelle Hickerson ("Hickerson), Patricia Morehart ("Morehart"), and Brenda Hoy ("Hoy") ("BOP Defendants").

2. A Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA") claim for medical negligence against Defendant United States of America ("USA").

3. The Arkansas Civil Rights Act ("ACRA"), along with counterpart claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1985, and 1986 for racial discrimination and violations of equal protection against Dr. Obi-Okoye, Dr. Woodard, Manos, Morehart, Harris, Hickerson, Hoy, James Robinson ("Robinson"), Gene Beasley ("Beasley"), J.F. Caraway ("Caraway"), and Ian Connors ("Conners"), ^[5]Lto. 10, 14, 37, 39, 54, 57, 60, 62, & 69.^[6]

B. Pending Motions for Summary Judgment^[7]

Defendant Manos has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, Amended Motion, Statement of Undisputed Facts, and Brief in Support arguing that Reed's claim of medical deliberate indifference should be dismissed. Docs. 73, 74, 75 & 76. Reed filed a Response and Manos filed a Reply. Docs. 78 & 87.

Separate Defendants Dr. Obi-Okoye and Dr. Woodard have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, Brief in Support, Statement of Undisputed Facts, and Amended Statement of Undisputed Facts arguing that Reed's claim of medical deliberate indifference should be dismissed. Docs. 79, 80, 81 & 83. Reed did not file a Response.

Defendant United States and BOP Defendants Harris, Hickerson, Morehart, and Hoy have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, Statement of Undisputed Facts, and Brief in Support arguing that Reed's claims of medical deliberate indifference and negligent medical care should be dismissed. Docs. 84, 85, & 86. Reed did not file a Response.

Because Reed was unable to provide a current address for Defendant Dr. J. Capps, he never served.^[8] For the reasons explained below, the Court recommends that all of Defendants' separate Motions for Summary Judgment be GRANTED and that all of Reed's claims against Defendants Manos, Dr. Obi-Okoye, Dr. Woodard, the United States, Harris, Hickerson, Morehart and Hoy be dismissed, with prejudice.

Because Reed has not provided the Court with a Motion for Service containing Defendant Dr. J. Capps' proper service address, as explained to Reed in the Order dated December 10, 2020 (Doc. 70), Reed's claims against Dr. Capps should be dismissed, without prejudice.

Finally, because the undisputed facts demonstrate that Reed received constitutionally adequate medical care, his racial discrimination and equal protection claims against all Defendants under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1985, and 1986, and ACRA, should be DISMISSED, without prejudice.

II. Discussion

Before reaching the merits of Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment, the Court will review the relevant undisputed facts giving rise to Reed's claims. The Court gave Reed an opportunity to Respond to the Motions for Summary Judgment and Statements of Undisputed Facts. Doc. 88. The Court informed Reed that, at the summary judgment stage, he could not rest upon his allegations and must now meet proof with proof. Doc. 88 at 1-2. Finally, the Court cautioned Reed that, under Local Rule 56.1, he was obligated to respond to Defendants' Statements of Undisputed Facts if he disagreed with any of Defendants' statements:

[F]ailure to timely and properly file a Response and Statement of Disputed Facts to a Motion for Summary Judgment will result in: (a) all of the facts in the applicable Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts being deemed undisputed by Plaintiff; and (b) the possible dismissal of this action, without prejudice, pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).

Doc. 88 at 1-2.

Reed did not file a Statement of Disputed Facts contesting anything contained in Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts.^[9] Accordingly, all of the facts recited in Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts are now deemed to be undisputed and the Court can accept those facts as true.

A. Undisputed Material Facts

1. Reed arrived at the FCI-FC on October 24, 2013. During his incarceration at FCI-FC, Reed was treated by a number of health professionals, including a BOP dermatologist and an outside dermatologist in Memphis. Doc. 83 at ¶ 3.

2. During his initial health screening on October 29, 2013, Reed had a prurient rash on his face and back. Reed estimated he had this rash for two weeks.

Doc. 85 at ¶¶ 1-2. Medical notes documented a scar on Reed's back and 1mm lesions on his upper lip, cheeks, and upper back. Doc. 85-1 at 31. Nondefendant Kathleen Maples, APN, prescribed doxycycline monohydrate for an unspecified local infection of the skin and substations tissue. Doc. 85-1 at 32.

3. On October 30, 2013, Dr. Obi-Okoye evaluated Reed at his 14 day post-intake medical evaluation. The evaluation focused on Reed's sleep apnea and obesity. Doc. 83 at ¶ 4.

4. On November 15, 2013, Reed was seen in health services for a rash on his right foot. A nondefendant provider noted a small open area on Reed's right foot, prescribed clotrimazole cream, and advised Reed to return if the problem worsened. Doc. 85 at ¶ 3; Doc. 85-1 at 35-36.

5. On January 7, 2014, Reed returned to health services complaining of a foot rash with open sores that had not healed. He was prescribed miconazole cream and provided gauze to wrap the affected area to aid healing. Doc. 85 at ¶ 5; Doc. 85-1 at 39-40.

6. Read returned to health services on January 27, 2014. The rash had spread and he was suffering abscesses. A nondefendant provider diagnosed cellulitis and prescribed clindamycin HLC. Doc. 85 at ¶ 5; Doc. 85-1 at 43-44.

7. On February 6, 2014, Reed returned to health services and complained that his foot infection was not improving after taking the prescribed antibiotics. A provider noted temporarily acute, worsening skin condition, prescribed doxycycline monohydrate, and administered an injection of ceftriaxone. Doc. 85 at ¶ 6; Doc. 85-1 at 49-52.

8. On February 27, 2014, Reed returned to health services for follow-up. After finishing all of his prescribed antibiotics, his foot seemed to be getting worse. A provider requested a dermatology consultation for a persistent fungal infection, with cellulitis, that had failed to improve after treatment with multiple prescriptions. The provider advised Reed to return immediately if his condition worsened. Doc. 85 at ¶ 7; Doc. 85-1 at 54-56.

9. On March 5, 2014, Reed saw BOP dermatologist John Hardin, M.D. through a teledermatology consult. Dr. Hardin diagnosed Reed with eczematous dermatitis, prescribed betamethasone dipropionate ointment, informed health services this is a recurrent condition that...