Washington v. Dunn et al
Filing
18
ORDER ADOPTING the Magistrate Judges 10 REPORT AND ACCEPTING the 10 RECOMMENDATION as MODIFIED. The court ORDERS that all claims in this action, except the Eighth Amendment claims against Dentist Dr. John Doe, Wardens Bolling and Miree, and O fficers Johnson and Fox for monetary damages are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The court further ORDERS that the Eighth Amendment claims against Dentist Dr. John Doe, Wardens Bolling and Miree, and Officers Johnson and Fox for monetary damages are REFERRED to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Judge Karon O Bowdre on 2/10/2021. (JLC)
FILED
2021 Feb-10 AM 11:32
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
ISAAC WASHINGTON,
Plaintiff,
v.
JEFFERSON DUNN, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 2:18-cv-00785-KOB-JHE
ORDER
The magistrate judge entered a report on May 21, 2020, recommending all
claims in this action, except the Eighth Amendment claims against Dentist Dr. John
Doe and Officers Johnson and Fox for monetary damages be dismissed without
prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted. (Doc. 10). The magistrate judge further recommended the
plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against Dr. John Doe and Officers Johnson
and Fox be referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Id. at 13).
The plaintiff objects to the dismissal of his Eighth Amendment dental care
claims against Warden Bolling and Miree, and in so doing alleges that his May 2,
2018 transport to “UAB Hospital” had been unreasonably delayed for twenty days
because Bolling and Miree knew his broken tooth required emergency medical
treatment as per Dr. John Doe and also knew that he was in extreme pain and could
not eat. (Doc. 11 at 2-3). The plaintiff repeats that Bolling and Miree refused to
intervene on his behalf to alleviate the extreme pain he reported between April 10,
2018 and May 2, 2018, declaring that the May 2, 2018 procedure at UAB was in fact
for “emergency” extraction of the broken tooth. (Id.). Finally, the plaintiff alleges
for the first time that on May 3, 2018 and May 4, 2018, Bolling and Miree knew that
defendants Johnson and Fox prevented him from attending pill call to take his postsurgical medication. (Doc. 11 at 2).
Because the objections contain additional facts not present in the initial
complaint the court considers them to be, in part, an amendment to his complaint.
The augmented factual allegations are sufficient, for 1915A screening purposes, to
suggest plausible Eighth Amendment claims against defendants Bolling and Miree
for deliberate indifference to his serious dental needs.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the
court file, including the report and recommendation, the objections to it and the
amendment to the plaintiff’s complaint, the magistrate judge’s report is hereby
ADOPTED and the recommendation is ACCEPTED as MODIFIED. The court
ORDERS that all claims in this action, except the Eighth Amendment claims against
Dentist Dr. John Doe, Wardens Bolling and Miree, and Officers Johnson and Fox
for monetary damages are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The court further ORDERS that the Eighth Amendment claims
2
against Dentist Dr. John Doe, Wardens Bolling and Miree, and Officers Johnson and
Fox for monetary damages are REFERRED to the magistrate judge for further
proceedings.
DONE and ORDERED this 10th day of February, 2021.
____________________________________
KARON OWEN BOWDRE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?