Roundtree v. N.Y.C.

• Decision Date: 30 September 2021
• Docket Number: 15 Civ. 8198 (JPC)
• Parties: JUEL ROUNDTREE, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK CITY et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

JUEL ROUNDTREE, Plaintiff,
v.
NEW YORK CITY et al., Defendants.

No. 15 Civ. 8198 (JPC)

United States District Court, S.D. New York

September 30, 2021

OPINION AND ORDER

JOHN P. CRONAN, United States District Judge:

Plaintiff Juel Roundtree was an inmate at a jail on Rikers Island in the Bronx, New York. Over the course of this litigation, Roundtree has brought a host of claims alleging a range of misconduct and unsatisfactory prison conditions at Rikers, most of which have been dismissed. What remain are his claims against the City of New York, the prison's health providers, and various doctors and corrections officers, alleging constitutional violations arising from the prison's failure to accommodate his medical condition by providing him with a double mattress and a special chair, and his allegations of excessive force arising from the prison staff's use of chemical spray. Defendants move for partial summary judgment, seeking dismissal of Roundtree's claims relating to his bedding and seating arrangements. For reasons that follow, the motion is denied, except that the Court dismisses Roundtree's claims against certain unnamed “Doe” defendants and terminates those defendants from this action.

1

I. Background

A. Facts^[1]

Roundtree was in the custody of the New York Department of Corrections (“DOC”) from May 26, 2015 to December 7, 2017. Defts. 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 28. During Roundtree's time in DOC custody, detainees were provided medical treatment by Defendants Health + Hospitals Corporation (“H+H”) and Corizon Health Services (“Corizon”), as well as Damian Health Services and the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Id. ¶ 16.

When Roundtree entered DOC custody, he was assessed to suffer from medical conditions that included chronic pain, a torn meniscus, rotator cuff syndrome, osteoarthritis, and obesity. Id. ¶ 29. After being hit by a car in 2012, Roundtree experienced head trauma and injuries to his left shoulder and knees. Id. ¶ 30; see Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 52, 73, 81 (Roundtree testifying that he suffers from shoulder, back, hip, and knee problems and that the accident broke his elbow and bones in both legs, caused a stroke and neurological damage, and required resuscitation at the scene). Roundtree testified that “[throughout [his] entire time [at] Rikers, from the first day that [he] was there, [he] communicated” that he was “experiencing pain to the medical staff.” Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 98. The prison clinic prescribed painkillers and renewed his prescription at least once per month. Defts. 56.1 Stmt. ¶¶ 30-31. Roundtree's medication renewals were often handled by Defendant Dr. Arkady Chechever. Id. ¶ 33. Roundtree also occasionally was permitted to use a cane in the jail. Id. ¶¶ 29, 34.

2

As reflected in his medical records, Roundtree, with the support of medical professionals, requested from prison staff certain furniture, specifically a second mattress and a special chair, to alleviate his pain and discomfort.^[2] During psychosocial/mental health evaluations on October 29, 2015 and November 30, 2015, Roundtree complained about the hardness of the chairs at Rikers. Id. ¶ 41. On March 8, 2016, Dr. Evangelista at Defendant Bellevue Hospital, on a referral from an orthopedic specialist at Rikers, examined Roundtree's shoulder injuries and recommended that he be provided a higher chair^[3] and two mattresses. Id. ¶ 37; see Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 131-32 (testifying that a doctor at Bellevue Hospital approved his receipt of a double mattress and higher seating, which the DOC honored). In addition, on March 10, 2016, Dr. Pravin Ranjan similarly issued a permit for the jail to provide Roundtree a double mattress. Defts. 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 40.

Roundtree testified that he first requested a double mattress “after a week or two” at Rikers. Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 99. He testified that he told medical staff that the mattress in his cell aggravated his back and knee pain and that a doctor recommended a double mattress. Id. at 101, 103. Roundtree also testified that from June 2015 to March 2016, medical staff regularly provided

3

him a double mattress, Defts. 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 43; Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 104, including “ten separate times, ” Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 103. But corrections officers frequently confiscated Roundtree's second mattress. Defts. 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 44. They had been trained to confiscate second mattresses from all inmates except those with medical referrals. Id. ¶ 49. When his mattress was confiscated, Roundtree testified that he would get another referral, id., meaning that he “had a double mattress consistently that kept being taken away . . . for almost two years, ” Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 104. He was sometimes left without a second mattress for “quite some time.” Id. at 109.

The provision of a double mattress to Roundtree was consistent with DOC policy through April 2016. Before then, an inmate was allowed to have a second mattress if that inmate received a referral from medical staff at Rikers. Defts. 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 49. The prison considered double mattresses “a medical decision for medical staff in the clinic.” Id. ¶ 48. The jail limited double mattresses to inmates with medical referrals because of security concerns as inmates can “hide contraband-such as weapons-in or between the mattresses.” Id. ¶ 49.

In April 2016, however, H+H and Corizon “implemented a new policy that prohibited the issuance of two mattresses . . . by [Correctional Health Services] staff.” Id. ¶ 20. That means, even if a doctor makes a referral for an inmate to receive a double mattress, DOC must now refuse to honor that referral. Id. ¶ 23. The April 2016 policy reflected the view that there is no medical justification for a double mattress referral, id. ¶ 22, as “the distinction between one or two mattresses is not a medical issue, ” id. ¶ 27. Also underlying the policy was the belief of H+H and Corizon that medical staff were making so many double mattress referrals that it became a distraction from other work. Id. ¶¶ 24-25.

4

Roundtree testified that after the policy went into effect, some sympathetic prison staff members who “understood [his] pain from watching [him] walk” allowed him to have a double mattress, but the additional mattress “kept getting . . . taken away” by security. Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 108-10, 113. Some medical staff members also told Roundtree that they could no longer “write out permits under the policy. Id. at 110. “Dr. Ranjan and Dr. Comas, ” however, continued to write Roundtree referrals, according to Roundtree. Id. at 113. But consistent with the April 2016 policy, a medical administrator named “Roberts” would ensure that such referrals were not honored. Id.

Roundtree testified that, in approximately July 2015, after Rikers replaced the chairs in its mess hall with benches, he sought and obtained a medical referral to continue to use a chair due to his hip problems. Id. at 116-18. He testified that the benches caused problems with his adductor tendons. Id. at 129. At some point, Roundtree was also provided two chairs to keep in his cell by a sympathetic warden who was not a doctor. Oct. 31, 2019 Deposition at 147-48. But corrections officers would remove the chairs in Roundtree's cell, causing Roundtree to seek replacements. Defts. 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 45. He “had to get new chairs every time.” Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 120. But “[a]fter a while, ” Roundtree testified that he had “continued access to the chairs.” Oct. 31, 2019 Deposition at 148.

Roundtree further testified that he complained about his inability to secure a double mattress to medical staff, the disability rights coordinator, and local politicians. Sept. 5, 2019 Deposition at 112. He filed “over one hundred grievances, ” including some “with respect to the mattress.” Id. at 107. Because Roundtree was Chairman of the prison's Inmate Council, he was also able to raise the matter at meetings with “hierarchy in the DOC administration.” Id. at 112.

5

B. Procedural History

Roundtree initially filed suit pro se and in forma pauperis on October 16, 2015. Dkts. 1, 2. The case was assigned to the Honorable Loretta A. Preska. Dkt. 5. On January 29, 2016, Judge Preska dismissed Roundtree's first complaint for failure to state a claim. Dkt. 10; see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). On May 9, 2016, Roundtree filed an amended complaint. Dkt. 17.

On June 10, 2016, the case was reassigned to the Honorable William H. Pauley III. On January 4, 2017, Rountree filed a second amended complaint. Dkt. 48. On March 27, 2017, Defendants moved to dismiss, Dkt. 53, and Judge Pauley granted the motion on March 28, 2018, Dkt. 84 (“Motion to Dismiss Opinion”). Judge Pauley dismissed all of Roundtree's claims with prejudice “except for his claims relating to: (1) deprivation of adequate bedding and seating, and (2) excessive force through the use of chemical sprays, ” which Judge Pauley dismissed without prejudice. Id. at 30. Judge Pauley ordered Roundtree to file any third amended complaint addressing only those two issues by May 25, 2018. Id. at 30-31. After extensions, Roundtree filed a third amended complaint (which was mistakenly docketed as his second) on July 18, 2018. Dkt. 91.

On September 11, 2018, Judge Pauley ordered Roundtree to file a fourth amended complaint limited to those two potentially surviving claims by October 15, 2018. Dkt. 105 at 4-5. After more extensions, Roundtree filed the Fourth Amended Complaint on February 5, 2019. Dkt. 124. Because the Fourth Amended Complaint pleaded claims that had previously been dismissed with prejudice, on April 17, 2019, Judge Pauley dismissed all claims but those relating to inadequate bedding and seating and the jail's use of chemical sprays. Dkt. 140 at 1. The remaining causes of action in the Fourth Amended Complaint are: (1) “Excessive Force/Failure to Intervene/Assault and Battery[/]Deliberate...