PRITT v. CORRECT CARE SERVICES et al

Filing 15

ENTRY - Screening Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings; The plaintiff's allegations are sufficient to state Eighth Amendment medical claims against Nurse Pamela Hansen, Nurse Debra Darlene Clemons, Tracy Roberts, H. Clark, Megan Andrews, Nurse Alexander Shelton, Megan Matthews, Lauren Kannaple, Laura Poland, Jennifer Eidson, Nurse Brian Carter, Hadley Wheatcraft, Melissa Rigney, and Heather Michelle Clark. He also states an Eighth Amendment policy or practice claim against Correct C are Solutions.However, the plaintiff's claims against unknown John Doe or Jane Doe defendants must be dismissed. The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to defendants Nurse Pamela Hansen, Nurse Debra Darlene Clemons, Tracy Roberts, H. Clark, Megan Andrews, Nurse Alexander Shelton, Megan Matthews, Lauren Kannaple, Laura Poland, Jennifer Eidson, Nurse Brian Carter, Hadley Wheatcraft, Melissa Rigney, Heather Michelle Clark, and Correct Care Solutions in the manner specified by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint (docket 1), applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Entry. The clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect that the defendants named in the above paragraph are the only defendants in this action. The clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect that defendant "Correct Care Services" is properly named "Corr ect Care Solutions."The plaintiff shall have through January 29, 2018, in which to notify the Court whether he wishes the Court to sever the misjoined claim identified above into an additional case. If the plaintiff fails to notify the Court regarding the misjoined claim by the above date, it will be considered abandoned and will be dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 1/9/2018. Copies Mailed. (CKM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

STEVEN W. PRITT,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
vs.
CORRECT CARE SERVICES, et al.
Defendants.

No. 1:17-cv-02664-SEB-MPB

Entry Screening Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings
I.
The plaintiff is a prisoner currently incarcerated at New Castle Correctional Facility.
Because the plaintiff is a “prisoner” as defined by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(h), this Court has an obligation
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) to screen his complaint before service on the defendants. Pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), the Court must dismiss the complaint if it is frivolous or malicious, fails to
state a claim for relief, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such
relief. In determining whether the complaint states a claim, the Court applies the same standard
as when addressing a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). See
Lagerstrom v. Kingston, 463 F.3d 621, 624 (7th Cir. 2006). To survive dismissal,
[the] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a
claim for relief that is plausible on its face. A claim has facial plausibility when
the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable
inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Pro se complaints such as that filed by the plaintiff
are construed liberally and held to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by
lawyers. Obriecht v. Raemisch, 517 F.3d 489, 491 n.2 (7th Cir. 2008).

The plaintiff brings this action against the defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He
alleges that he was housed at the Marion County Jail (“MCJ”) on three separate occasions for court
hearings—December 10-17, 2015; July 12-21, 2016; and February 17-21, 2017. During each of
these occasions, the plaintiff alleges that he was denied medications for his heart condition and
mental health issues. These denials were at times caused by a policy of defendant Correct Care
Solutions, which prohibits inmates from retaining or having access to their medications when they
are transferred to MCJ and during the first few days of incarceration there. He also alleges that
several of the defendants simply denied him his medication and that he was at times told he could
have it once he returned to his normal correctional facility. The plaintiff alleges that these denials
caused him significant injury, including the risk of death.

He seeks injunctive relief and

compensatory damages.
A.

Properly Joined Claims

The plaintiff’s allegations are sufficient to state Eighth Amendment medical claims against
Nurse Pamela Hansen, Nurse Debra Darlene Clemons, Tracy Roberts, H. Clark, Megan Andrews,
Nurse Alexander Shelton, Megan Matthews, Lauren Kannaple, Laura Poland, Jennifer Eidson,
Nurse Brian Carter, Hadley Wheatcraft, Melissa Rigney, and Heather Michelle Clark. He also
states an Eighth Amendment policy or practice claim against Correct Care Solutions.
However, the plaintiff’s claims against unknown John Doe or Jane Doe defendants must
be dismissed. “[I]t is pointless to include [an] anonymous defendant [ ] in federal court; this type
of placeholder does not open the door to relation back under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15, nor can it otherwise
help the plaintiff.” Wudtke v. Davel, 128 F.3d 1057, 1060 (7th Cir. 1997) (internal citations
omitted).

Additionally, to the extent the plaintiff wishes to bring a constitutional claim based on a
denial of the grievance process, such allegations fail to state a constitutional violation. The
Seventh Circuit has “specifically denounc[ed] a Fourteenth Amendment substantive due-process
right to an inmate grievance procedure.” Grieveson v. Anderson, 538 F.3d 763, 772 (7th Cir. 2008).
As explained in Antonelli v. Sheahan, 81 F.3d 1422, 1430-31 (7th Cir. 1996), “any right to a
grievance procedure is a procedural right, not a substantive one. Accordingly, a state’s inmate
grievance procedures do not give rise to a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause.”
Id. at 1430-31 (citations omitted).
B.

Misjoined Claims

The plaintiff also asserts an Eighth Amendment claim against Melissa Rigney and a Jane
Doe nurse. He alleges that on December 13, 2016, they gave him a medication to which he had
an adverse reaction, including memory loss. In George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007),
the Seventh Circuit explained that “[u]nrelated claims against different defendants belong in
different suits.” When unrelated claims are brought in the same suit, “[t]he court may . . . sever
any claim against a party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. The purpose of this rule is “not only ‘to prevent
the sort of morass’ produced by multi-claim, multi-defendants suits like this one, but also to ensure
that prisoners pay all fees required under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.” Owens v. Hinsley,
635 F.3d 950, 952 (7th Cir. 2011) (quoting George, 507 F.3d at 952).
This unrelated claim against different defendants “belong[s] in [a] different suit[].”
George, 507 F.3d 952. As the master of his complaint, the plaintiff shall be given the opportunity
to determine which course is followed, as set forth further below. See Myles v. United States, 416
F.3d 551, 552 (7th Cir. 2005).

II.
Given the foregoing, the following claims shall proceed:
•

Eighth Amendment medical claims against Nurse Pamela Hansen, Nurse Debra
Darlene Clemons, Tracy Roberts, H. Clark, Megan Andrews, Nurse Alexander
Shelton, Megan Matthews, Lauren Kannaple, Laura Poland, Jennifer Eidson, Nurse
Brian Carter, Hadley Wheatcraft, Melissa Rigney, Heather Michelle Clark, and
Correct Care Solutions.

The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to defendants
Nurse Pamela Hansen, Nurse Debra Darlene Clemons, Tracy Roberts, H. Clark, Megan Andrews,
Nurse Alexander Shelton, Megan Matthews, Lauren Kannaple, Laura Poland, Jennifer Eidson,
Nurse Brian Carter, Hadley Wheatcraft, Melissa Rigney, Heather Michelle Clark, and Correct Care
Solutions in the manner specified by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint
(docket 1), applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons
and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Entry.
The clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect that the defendants named in the above
paragraph are the only defendants in this action. The clerk is directed to update the docket to
reflect that defendant “Correct Care Services” is properly named “Correct Care Solutions.”
The plaintiff shall have through January 29, 2018, in which to notify the Court whether
he wishes the Court to sever the misjoined claim identified above into an additional case. The
plaintiff is notified that an additional case will make him responsible for the filing fee in that case
and the screening requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A will also be triggered. This means that merely
because the claim is severed into a new action does not mean that those actions will necessarily
pass the screening required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. This Entry does not rule on that question one
way or another. Instead of asking the Court to sever the claims into new actions, the plaintiff may
also notify the Court that he will simply file a new complaint for the misjoined claim.

If the plaintiff fails to notify the Court regarding the misjoined claim by the above date, it
will be considered abandoned and will be dismissed without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: _____________
1/9/2018

_______________________________
SARAH EVANS BARKER, JUDGE
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana

Distribution:
STEVEN W. PRITT
196024
NEW CASTLE - CF
NEW CASTLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY - Inmate Mail/Parcels
1000 Van Nuys Road
NEW CASTLE, IN 47362
Nurse Pamela Hansen
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Nurse Debra Darlene Clemons
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Tracy Roberts
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
H. Clark
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Megan Andrews
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204

Nurse Alexander Shelton
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Megan Matthews
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Lauren Kannaple
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Laura Poland
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Jennifer Eidson
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Nurse Brian Carter
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Hadley Wheatcraft
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Melissa Rigney
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Heather Michelle Clark
Employee at Marion County Jail
40 S. Alabama St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204

Correct Care Solutions
1283 Murfeesboro Rd., Suite 500
Nashville, TN 37217