Ford v. Deville et al

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM ORDER: Directing plaintiff to amend complaint. Pro Se Response due by 12/28/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joseph H L Perez-Montes on 11/28/2017. (crt,Haik, K)

a
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
KARIM FORD (#407792),
Plaintiff

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-1057-P

VERSUS

JUDGE DEE D. DRELL

KEITH DEVILLE, ET AL.,
Defendants

MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the Court is the civil rights complaint (42 U.S.C. § 1983) of pro se
Plaintiff Karim Ford (“Ford”). Ford has been granted leave to proceed in forma

pauperis. (Doc. 8). Ford is an inmate in the custody of the Louisiana Department of
Corrections, incarcerated at Winn Correctional Center in Winnfield, Louisiana. Ford
complains that he was denied medical care.
I.

Background
Ford alleges that on June 27, 2017, he requested medical care from Sgt.

Wiggins for “a bite and rash” that was spreading down Ford’s leg. Ford was informed
that, to make a “self-declared emergency,” a second officer had to verify the illness or
injury. (Doc. 1, p. 5). Ford showed the affected area to another officer, who spoke
with Sgt. Wiggins. However, Ford’s request for a “self-declared emergency” was
denied. (Doc. 1, p. 5). Ford spoke to Lt. Johnson, who escorted Ford to Captain
Howard and Major Jordan. Major Jordan informed Ford that Ms. Price from the
medical department is the daughter of the warden, so the warden will agree with
whatever decision she makes. (Doc. 1, p. 5).

II.

Instructions to Amend
Prison officials violate the Eighth Amendment’s proscription against cruel and

unusual punishment when they act with deliberate indifference to the serious
medical needs of prisoners. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994); Estelle
v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 105 (1976). Deliberate indifference “is an extremely high
standard to meet.” Gobert v. Caldwell, 463 F.3d 339, 346 (5th Cir. 2006) (citation
omitted). An inmate must show that prison personnel “refused to treat him, ignored
his complaints, intentionally treated him incorrectly, or engaged in any similar
conduct that would clearly evidence a wanton disregard for any serious medical
needs.” Domino v. Tex. Dep’t Crim. J., 239 F.3d 752, 756 (5th Cir. 2001) (quoting
Johnson v. Treen, 759 F.2d 1236, 1238 (5th Cir. 1985)).
Ford implies that Ms. Price from the medical department made the decision to
deny Ford’s request for emergency care. Ford should clarify who he claims actually
denied his request for medical care on June 27, 2017. If Ms. Price is the person that
denied Ford care, Ford should state what, if anything, each of the other defendants
did to violate Ford’s constitutional rights.
Ford should amend and state whether he made a regular, non-emergency,
request for medical care for the bite and rash after the emergency request was denied.
If so, Ford should state the date on which his non-emergency request was made, and
whether medical care for the bite and rash was ever provided.
Finally, Ford should state what, if any, injury he suffered as a result of the
denial of medical care on June 27, 2017.
2

III.

Conclusion
IT IS ORDERED that Ford amend his complaint within thirty (30) days of the

filing of this Order to provide the information outlined above, or dismissal of this
action will be recommended under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in chambers in Alexandria, Louisiana, this ____
28th
day of November, 2017.
____________________________________
Joseph H.L. Perez-Montes
United States Magistrate Judge

3