Simpkins v. Grandview Hosp.

• Decision Date: 23 July 2020
• Docket Number: Case No. 3:19-cv-227
• Parties: RICHARD LEE SIMPKINS, III, Plaintiff, v. GRANDVIEW HOSPITAL, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Ohio

RICHARD LEE SIMPKINS, III, Plaintiff, v. GRANDVIEW HOSPITAL, et al., Defendants.

Case No. 3:19-cv-227

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

July 23, 2020

District Judge Walter H. Rice

Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION¹THAT: (1) THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS FILED BY PLAINTIFF AND BY DEFENDANTS DAYTON OSTEOPATHIC HOSPITAL (D/B/A GRANDVIEW HOSPITAL), KETTERING ADVENTIST HEALTHCARE (D/B/A KETTERING HEALTH NETWORK), CORNEJA, VAN HORNE, JENKINS, MARIEN, AND REVINE (DOCS. 21, 28) BE GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; (2) THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS FILED BY DEFENDANTS GRANDVIEW FOUNDATION, BROCHU, AND BRIENZA BE GRANTED (DOCS. 21, 24); (3) THE MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS FILED BY DEFENDANT JANSSEN PHARAMCEUTICALS, INC. BE GRANTED (DOC. 70); AND (4) THE MOTION TO DISMISS FILED BY DEFENDANTS HORNE AND FUENTES BE GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART (AND THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, IN THE ALTERANTIVE, BE DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE) (DOC. 78)

***

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO CONDUCT DISCOVERY (DOC. 83)

This civil case is before the Court on the amended complaint filed by pro se Plaintiff Richard Lee Simpkins, III against twenty Defendants. Doc. 9. The named Defendants are as follows: (1) Dayton Osteopathic Hospital; (2) EmCare; (3) Grandview Foundation; (4) Kettering Adventist Healthcare; (5) Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; (6) Joseph Blake; (7) Nicolas Brienza; (8) Loredel Corneja; (9) Adan Fuentes, M.D.; (10) Stephanie Horne, M.D.; (11) David Jenkins, D.O.; (12) Andrew Lane; (13) Brian Lewis; (14) Shawn Marien, D.O.; (15) Christopher McIntosh, D.O; (16) Shannon Revine; (17) Joshua Spears; (18) Nicole Van Horne, D.O.; (19) Joseph Wiley; and (20) Craig Wolfe. See id. at PageID 116-20. Simkins's amended complaint asserts civil rights and conspiracy claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and/or § 1985 and the following claims presumably arising under state law: assault, battery, rape, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and products liability. Doc. 9. Defendants Kettering Health Network² and Grandview Hospital,³ in turn, have pled the following counterclaims against Simkins: defamation and tortious interference with a business relationship. Doc. 20 at PageID 201-08.

Now pending before the Court are a number of motions. Initially, there are several motions to dismiss and/or for judgment on the pleadings directed to the amended complaint filed by Defendants (docs. 21, 24, 70) as well as Simkins's memoranda in opposition (docs. 30, 52, 53, 76) and Defendants' replies (docs. 45, 75, 79). Additionally, there is a motion to dismiss the counterclaims of Defendants Dayton Osteopathic Hospital and Kettering Adventist Hospital filed by Simkins (doc. 28) and Defendants' opposition memorandum (doc. 51). Finally, there is a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment filed by Defendants Horne and Fuentes (doc. 78) as well as Simkins's opposition memorandum (doc. 83) and Defendants' reply (doc. 89). The undersigned has carefully considered the aforementioned motions -- all of which have been fully briefed and are ripe for decision.

I.

Accepting his claims pled in the amended complaint as true and liberally construing them in his favor, as the Court is required to do in this instance, see Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007), Simkins alleges as follows: on September 13, 2017, Defendant Lewis, a Dayton Police Officer (or, perhaps, Defendant Brienza claiming to be Lewis) responded to a report of a motorcycle in the roadway.⁴ Doc. 9 at PageID 125. Upon Officer Lewis's arrival, Simkins requested an attorney, at which time Lewis allegedly beat him with the butt of his pistol until Simkins was unconscious. Id. Lewis then allegedly "roused [Simkins] by flicking his eye." Id. at PageID 126.

Thereafter, Defendants Joseph Wiley and Craig Wolfe arrived at the scene in an ambulance. Id. Wiley and Wolfe, at Lewis's instruction, purportedly dragged Simkins to the edge of a bridge and threatened to throw him into the river. Id. After Wiley and Wolfe put Simkins in the ambulance, Lewis instructed them to take Simkins to Grandview Hospital, at which time Lewis allegedly put a gun to the back of Plaintiff's head and threatened to kill him. Id.

The ambulance took Simkins to Grandview for medical treatment despite his objection to being taken there. Id. at PageID 127. When he arrived at Grandview, Simkins alleges he was given Ativan⁵ in an effort to "facilitate memory loss." Id. Simkins asserts that, shortly thereafter, Lewis took him back to the scene allegedly for the purpose of inflicting additional injuries on him. Id. Simkins was then transported back to Grandview, where Lewis allegedly continued to assault him, threatened to kill him, and threatened to "remove [Simkins's] organs." Id. Lewis also allegedly ordered Defendant McIntosh to give Simkins certain "drugs." Id.

Simkins informed the medical staff (including Paul Levy, D.O.) that he did not wish to be treated at the facility for religious reasons. Id. McIntosh and Levy conferred with Lewis and allegedly decided to have Simkins involuntarily committed, i.e., "pink slipp[ed]." Id. at PageID 128-29. During that time, Defendant Van Horne administered oxygen to Simkins despite his continued protestation to treatment, and he was subjected to imaging scans against his wishes, such as a CT scan (which included injecting Simkins with blue and yellow contrast dye) performed by Defendant Revine, and forty-one (41) x-ray scans conducted by Jenkins under McIntosh's supervision. Id. at PageID 129-31. Additionally, Revine and McIntosh prescribed and/or administered "drugs" to Simkins against his wishes. Id.

Thereafter, Simkins was returned to the emergency room where Defendant Spears, a Dayton Police Officer, "ma[d]e an appearance." Id. at PageID 132. Spears and Lewis allegedly threatened Simkins's life by pointing a firearm at the back of his head, and subsequently placed him under arrest. Id. Spears allegedly then punched Simkins several times in the right lower jaw while he was restrained (allegedly because he demanded an attorney and/or requested copies of paperwork). Id. at PageID 132-33. Defendant Carpenter was also alleged to be present during this time. Id. at PageID 133.

Simkins further alleges that Defendants Lewis, Spears and Marien threatened to murder him by "ripping [Simkins's] guts out" if he did not sign consent forms (either for consenting to medical treatment or a search). Id. at PageID 134. He was then subject to further medical procedures including a colonoscopy and an enema. Id. at PageID 134, 145. Simkins also alleges that Defendants Lewis, Spears, Jenkins and Marien conspired to perform these invasive medical procedures against his will. Id. Simkins additionally alleges that, while the enema was being administered, Lewis "rubb[ed] his crotch[,]" and both he and Spears threatened him with violence. Id. at PageID 145. Additionally, Simkins contends that Lewis, Spears, and Marien allegedly conspired to give him an overdose of a drug that stopped his heart three times, and then revived him with another drug to "traumatize" him, deprive his organs of oxygen, and facilitate memory loss. Id. at PageID 135. During this time, Marien also allegedly claimed to be Jenkins to confuse Simkins. Id.

Simkins further alleges that, at the direction of McIntosh, Defendant Corneja -- with the alleged participation of Lewis, Spears, Marien, Jenkins, and Van Horne -- forcibly injected him with a number of drugs (including Haldol⁶) to induce lasting cognitive defects and to "wipe out" his memory. Id. at PageID 134-35. Simkins alleges that such treatment was performed under the authority or control of Defendants Grandview Hospital, Kettering Health Network, and EmCare. Id. at 131-32. Simkins further asserts that Defendant Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. manufactured, marketed and made Haldol available for "off label use" despite its allegedly "dangerous side effects." Id. at PageID 142. Simkins also alleges that Haldol caused headaches, seizures or muscle spasms, memory loss, agitation, and the "bulk" of the medical injuries he alleges in this case. Id.

Thereafter, Simkins was allegedly given several more CT scans by Dr. McIntosh to allegedly "poison" Simkins with radiation, "cover[-]up" the damage done to him, and traumatize him. Id. at PageID 136-37. Hours later, Simkins awoke naked and freezing in a hospital bed, feeling worse than at the time of his arrival. Id. at PageID 137. As Simkins attempted to put on his clothes, McIntosh allegedly informed Simkins that he had an "air bubble" in his head, but he was free to go. Id. Simkins waited to leave until he felt a little better, and fell back asleep. Id.

Defendant Fuentes -- allegedly acting under orders from Lewis and Spears -- thereafter informed Simkins that he had an infection in his head, but his vision was normal and he did not have a concussion. Id. Marien interviewed Simkins again alleging to be Jenkins, and Horne also conducted a "release interview." Id. at PageID 139-40. PageID 141. Simkins alleges that he suffered a worsening cognitive state, and Horne allegedly drugged him and told him to "blow [his] f_cking head off." Id. at PageID 141. He further alleges that Horne's actions were in concert with Spears and Lewis. PageID 142.

On January 12, 2018 and February 2, 2018, Simpkins visited Horne for follow-up CT scans to seek information about his worsening cognitive state. Id. at PageID 142-43. He now claims such scans were performed against his wishes. Id. at PageID 143. Simkins also alleges Horne used Defendant Blake to review his CT scans, and Blake did so in violation of a no-contact order. Id. at PageID 144. Simkins alleges that on January 12, 2018, he was further traumatized when Van Horne allegedly tried to hug him and apologize. Id.

II.

The Court first addresses the Rule 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss and the Rule 12(c) mot...