Spavone v. N.Y. State Dep't of Corr. Servs.

• Decision Date: 20 June 2013
• Docket Number: No. 11–617.,11–617.
• Citation: 719 F.3d 127
• Parties: Steven SPAVONE, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, Brian Fischer, Commissioner (DOCS), Nick Chalk, Temporary Release Chairman (WCF), Deborah Joy, Director Temporary Release (DOCS), Defendants–Appellants.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

719 F.3d 127

Steven SPAVONE, Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, Brian Fischer, Commissioner (DOCS), Nick Chalk, Temporary Release Chairman (WCF), Deborah Joy, Director Temporary Release (DOCS), Defendants–Appellants.

No. 11–617.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued: Sept. 19, 2012.

Decided: June 20, 2013.

Matthew W. Grieco, Assistant Solicitor General (Barbara D. Underwood, Solicitor General, Benjamin N. Gutman, Deputy Solicitor General, Cecelia C. Chang, Assistant Solicitor General, on the brief), for Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General of the State of New York, New York, NY, for Defendants–Appellants.

Hannah Y.S. Chanoine, Mayer Brown LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiff–Appellee.

Before: LEVAL, KATZMANN and LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges.

DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judge:

This case concerns how the New York State Department of Correctional Services¹ (“DOCS”) determines when an inmate receives temporary medical leave from prison for the treatment of mental illness. Plaintiff–Appellee Steven Spavone (“Spavone”) requested a leave of absence from prison in order to obtain additional treatment for his post-traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”). DOCS officials Brian Fischer, Deborah Joy, and Nick Chalk (collectively, with DOCS, “Defendants–Appellants”) denied his request. Spavone then brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., alleging, among other things, that Defendants–Appellants' denial of his leave request violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection of the law and his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment. In a January 21, 2011 opinion and order, the District Court for the Southern District of New York (Patterson, J.) denied Defendants–Appellants' motion for summary judgment.

Fischer, Joy, and Chalk, the individual Defendants–Appellants, argue on appeal that the district court erred in rejecting their contention that they are entitled to qualified immunity from Spavone's § 1983 claims as a matter of law. We agree, and now reverse the district court's decision.²

Background

1. Factual Background

New York, like many states, allows some of its inmates to obtain temporary release from prison. Sections 851 through 861 of the New York Correction Law provide for several types of temporary release. Relevant here, a “leave of absence” permits an inmate to leave prison in order to visit a dying relative, attend a relative's funeral, or receive absolutely necessary medical treatment. N.Y. Correct. Law § 851(6). The Correction Law specifies that a medical leave of absence (“MLOA”) is available for the period of time necessary for an inmate

to undergo surgery or to receive medical or dental treatment not available in the correctional institution only if deemed absolutely necessary to the health and well-being of the inmate and whose approval is granted by the commissioner or his designated representative.

Id. § 851(6)(c). Regulations promulgated by DOCS reiterate this standard. SeeN.Y. Comp.Codes R. & Regs. tit. 7, § 1900.3(a)(3).

DOCS regulations establish the procedure for obtaining temporary release. SeeN.Y. Correct. Law § 852; N.Y. Comp.Codes R. & Regs. tit. 7, § 1900.1 et seq. Each correctional facility with inmates that could qualify for temporary release must have a three-member “temporary release committee” to review applications. N.Y. Comp.Codes R. & Regs. tit. 7, § 1900.2(a). Inmates apply to the committee by completing a form that states the type of temporary release they seek and their reasons for applying. Id. § 1900.4(a). After an inmate applies, a prison official checks the inmate's file and interviews him or her to ensure that the inmate is “statutorily or otherwise eligible for temporary release.” Id. § 1900.4(b), (c). Besides meeting the standard established in § 851, an inmate seeking a leave of absence typically must, among other requirements, be within two years of parole eligibility and not be currently incarcerated for certain violent offenses. Id. § 1900.4(c). The inmate's application must also receive a sufficiently high score based on a point system that takes into account factors such as criminal history and behavior while incarcerated. Id. § 1900.4(e). For medical leaves of absence, the Commissioner may waive these non-statutory eligibility requirements. Id.§ 1900.3(a)(3). But temporary release of any sort is apparently rare within New York's correctional system. In 2008, for example, DOCS granted only 19 leaves for a prison population of over 60,000.

Mental health treatment in the New York correctional system is provided by the New York State Office of Mental Health (“OMH”), a state agency charged by law with providing such care. SeeN.Y. Correct. Law § 401. A Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between OMH and DOCS establishes the various levels of care that OMH is obligated to offer within different DOCS facilities. At some prisons, mostly maximum security, OMH provides a “satellite unit” that employs a full-time psychiatric staff. Satellite units provide crisis treatment programs with 24–hour observation, outpatient services, and “intermediate care programs.” MOU at 2–5. Outpatient services include “individual and group therapy and psychiatric services” that are “similar to mental health clinic services in the community.” Id. at 4. Intermediate care programs provide patients with housing separate from the general prison population “similar to day treatment and residential programs which exist in the community.” Id.

Pursuant to the MOU, DOCS and OMH “mutually agree upon the amount and level of mental health services required at each correctional facility.” Id. at 2. In contrast to a satellite unit, at some prisons OMH operates a “mental health unit” that staffs “[a] minimum of eight hours of psychiatric services a week” and provides outpatient services, but not crisis treatment or intermediate care programs. Id. at 5–6. Still other prisons afford fewer options. Id. at 6–9. Finally, OMH also provides in-patient services at the Central New York Psychiatric Center (“CNYPC”), a secure psychiatric hospital, for inmates requiring more intensive treatment. Id. at 17–18; see alsoN.Y. Correct. Law § 402. According to the MOU, “[i]nmates are assessed to determine the level of mental health services they will require and are assigned to facilities which have at least the identified level of services needed.” MOU at 2.

Plaintiff–Appellee Spavone suffers from PTSD, which he attributes to two experiences. First, Spavone traveled to Nicaragua in the 1980s to join the Contra rebel forces and saw combat while fighting with them in that country's civil war. Second, Spavone worked on the scaffolding of a building across the street from the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Credited with risking his life to rescue several of his coworkers, Spavone witnessed victims of the attack jump from the towers. Symptoms of Spavone's PTSD include anxiety, headaches, and vivid nightmares and flashbacks.³ Spavone takes several medications to treat the symptoms of his PTSD, and he claims that his PTSD greatly interferes with his daily functioning.

Spavone was convicted in 2003 of one count of robbery and four counts of attempted robbery in the first degree. He received ten-year concurrent sentences on all counts. From 2005 to 2007, Spavone was incarcerated at Eastern Correctional Facility (“Eastern”), a maximum-security prison with a mental health unit. In 2007 he was transferred to Woodbourne Correctional Facility (“Woodbourne”), a medium-security prison that also contains a mental health unit. Spavone was released from prison in 2011.

While he was at Eastern, Spavone received treatment for his PTSD from a psychologist, Dr. Edward Rudder (“Rudder”), and a psychiatrist, Dr. Venkateswara R. Inaganti (“Inaganti”). Spavone's treatment at Eastern included both psychiatric medication and group and individual therapy sessions. When Spavone learned that he would be transferred to Woodbourne, he informed Rudder and Inaganti that he would soon be eligible for a medical leave of absence and asked them to write a letter in support.⁴ The two sent a letter to Woodbourne dated April 27, 2007 in which they “strongly recommend[ed]” that Spavone obtain exposure therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, and group therapy, without specifying where such treatment could or should be provided. They asserted only that these treatments, “especially if provided in a community inpatient program,” would be of “great benefit” to Spavone.

Spavone was transferred in May 2007. According to him, Woodbourne did not initially provide him with the same level of care he had received at Eastern. Spavone's primary therapist was at first a social worker, not a psychologist, ⁵ and Spavone claims he was forced to organize his own group therapy sessions. After Spavone's transfer to Woodbourne and in response to Spavone's concerns about his PTSD treatment there, Dr. Al Shimkunas (“Shimkunas”), CNYPC's Chief Psychologist for Outpatient Services, interviewed Spavone, reviewed his diagnostic test results, and conducted a full psychological evaluation of him.

In August 2008 Spavone wrote to both Shimkunas and Dr. Donald Sawyer, CNYPC's Executive Director, from Woodbourne to elicit their assistance in obtaining temporary release. In a letter dated September 2, 2008, Shimkunas responded on behalf of both of them. Shimkunas noted that while Spavone's correspondence “implies that Central New York Psychiatric Center and Office of Mental Health Staff recommend that you be given temporary release in order to pursue further treatment in a residential program,” this was not a recommendation that Shimkunas and Sawyer were “at liberty to make.” Shimkunas continued, however, that they strongly recommended that Spavone's treatment continue and Shimkunas stated they were willing to ...