Randle v. Butler et al

Filing 124

ORDER ADOPTING 111 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS and GRANTING 78 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Jacob Weatherford, John Trost, Melissa Pappas, and Wexford Health Sources, Inc. These Defendants are DISMISSED without prejudice, and the Clerk's Office is DIRECTED to terminate them as parties to this action. Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 8/8/2018. (mlp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
CHARLES RANDLE,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
KIMBERLY BUTLER, JOHN BALDWIN, )
C/O BUMP, C/O WARD, DR. JOHN
)
TROST, GAIL WALLS, SYLVIA
)
BUTLER, DR. JACOB WEATHERFORD, )
WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC.,
)
and MELISSA PAPPAS,
)
)
Defendants.
)

Case No. 3:16-CV-1191-NJR-DGW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ROSENSTENGEL, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge Donald G. Wilkerson (Doc. 111) regarding the Motion for
Summary Judgment for Plaintiff’s Failure to Exhaust His Administrative Remedies, filed
by Defendants Melissa Pappas, Dr. Jacob Weatherford, Dr. John Trost, and Wexford
Health Sources, Inc. (Doc. 78). The Report and Recommendation recommends the Court
grant Defendants’ motion. No objection to the Report and Recommendation was filed.
Plaintiff Charles Randle filed this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against
15 defendants alleging they violated his constitutional rights while he was incarcerated
at Menard Correctional Center during 2015 and 2016 (Doc. 6). As relevant to the current
motion, Randle claims he was repeatedly denied mental health treatment for his
depression as well as treatment for a bunion, in violation of the Eighth Amendment (Id.).

Page 1 of 3

On November 17, 2017, Defendants Pappas, Weatherford, Trost and Wexford
filed the pending motion for summary judgment, arguing Randle did not exhaust his
administrative remedies before filing this lawsuit against them (Doc. 78). Magistrate
Judge Wilkerson held a hearing pursuant to Pavey v. Conley, 544 F.3d 739 (7th Cir. 2008),
on May 29, 2018 (Doc. 102). After considering the evidence in the record as well as the
testimony at the Pavey hearing, Magistrate Judge Wilkerson concluded that Randle did
not exhaust his administrative remedies with regard to these Defendants because his
only relevant grievance was never appealed to the Administrative Review Board before
he filed this lawsuit.
Because no party has filed an objection, the undersigned need not undertake de
novo review. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Johnson v.
Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 741 (7th Cir. 1999). Instead, the Court should review the
Report and Recommendation for clear error. Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734,
739 (7th Cir. 1999). The Court may then “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
While de novo review is not required here, the Court has carefully reviewed
Magistrate Judge Wilkerson’s Report and Recommendation for clear error. Following
this review, the Court agrees with the findings, analysis, and conclusions of Magistrate
Judge Wilkerson. 1 Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Wilkerson’s
Report and Recommendation (Doc. 111) and GRANTS the Motion for Summary
The Court notes one exception: Magistrate Judge Wilkerson recommended dismissing these Defendants
with prejudice, but a dismissal under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) must be without prejudice. Ford v. Johnson, 362
F.3d 395, 401 (7th Cir. 2004). Therefore, the Court does not adopt this specific recommendation.

1

Page 2 of 3

Judgment filed by Defendants Melissa Pappas, Dr. Jacob Weatherford, Dr. John Trost,
and Wexford Health Sources, Inc. (Doc. 78). These Defendants are DISMISSED without
prejudice, and the Clerk’s Office is DIRECTED to terminate them as parties to this
action.
After dismissal of these Defendants, the claims remaining in this case are:
Count 1 -

Eighth Amendment claim against Director John Baldwin and
Warden Kimberly Butler for subjecting Plaintiff to
unconstitutional conditions of confinement at Menard by
placing two inmates in a cell designed for only one, with
double bunks and limited exercise opportunities outside of
the cell.

Count 2 -

Eighth Amendment claim against Director Baldwin, Warden
Butler, and Nurse Gail Walls for exhibiting deliberate
indifference to Plaintiff’s bunion.

Count 4 -

Eighth Amendment claim against Warden Butler, C/O
Bump, and C/O Ward for failing to protect Plaintiff from his
cellmate, after Plaintiff was attacked and injured by him in
2016.

Count 6 -

Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference and/or
intentional infliction of emotional distress claim arising from
the denial of adequate mental health treatment by Dr. S.
Butler, Nurse Walls, Warden Butler, and Director Baldwin.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: August 8, 2018
____________________________
NANCY J. ROSENSTENGEL
United States District Judge

Page 3 of 3