Judd v. Gilmore et al
Filing
17
MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 2/11/2016. ( c/m 2/11/16 bas, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
ANTWOIN T. JUDD, #425-948
*
Plaintiff
*
v
*
JANICE GILMORE, RN
CARLA BUCK, RN
WEXFORD MEDICAL SOURCES, INC.
*
Defendants
*
Civil Actian No..JFM-15-1150
*
***
MEMORANDUM
Antwain T. Judd ("Judd") filed a civil rights camplaint under 42 U.S.C. ~ 1983, seeking
maney damages and declaratary relief against Wexfard Health Saurces, Inc. ("Wexford") and
twa af its emplayees. Judd, a self-represented prisaner haused at the Western Carrectianal
Institutian in Cumberland, Maryland ("WCI"), alleged that his Eighth Amendment right to.
medical care was vialated aver a seven manth periad when prisan health care praviders at WCI
ignared "numerous requests ...
to. be seen and treated far fever, vamiting, diarrhea [and]
malaise." ECF No.. 1 at 3. Judd also.alleged he was denied HIV testing and harmane treatment
required far "gender re-assignment" purpases.! Id
As a result, Judd claimed his health has
worsened and he has suffered "physical and mental distress and discamfart." Id at 4.
Defendants, cantractual medical care providers at WCI, filed a dispasitive mati an (ECF
No.. 5), appased by Judd (ECF No.. 8). The matian was granted in part as to.the dismissal af
defendant Wexfard. The caurt further faund that Judd had failed to.establish a vialatian afthe
1 Individuals with Gender Dysphoria, also known as Gender Identity Disorder ("GID"), feel strongly that
they are not the gender they physically appear to be. They sometimes are referred to as "transgendered."
Gender
dysphoria is not homosexuality; one's internal sense of gender is not the same as one's sexual orientation. See
http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/
gender-dysphoria.
Eighth Amendment based on records showing assessment and treatment for various chronic
ailments as well as HIV testing, which proved negative, and never had discussed GID during his
visits with mental health professionals, reserving that topic for his May 1, 2015 discussion with
Dr. Ottey? The court concluded that Judd suffered no actual injury as a result of the basic health
services provided, despite his refusal to regularly attend chronic care clinics and avail himself of
mental health services, including medication.
ECF No. 12 (Memorandum
of November 10,
2015).
Although a violation of the Eighth Amendment could not be established, the undersigned
did not close the case, because two questions remained.
First, Judd averred that his written
requests for GID assessment were properly submitted to medical personnel and ignored.
This
averment created an inference that the medical records submitted in support of defendants'
dispositive motion were incomplete, and defendants were ordered to address this concern.
Second, now that health care professionals are aware that Judd believes he suffers from GID, he
is entitled to medical and mental health services based on this need.
The court ordered
defendants to provide supplemental information concerning any medical and/or mental health
care provided to Judd in this regard subsequent to May 1,2015. Id. at p. 9.
Defendants have provided this information.3 ECF No. 14. Judd has requested evaluation
for GID, and a consultation with the appropriate clinic at University of Maryland Health System
has been approved.
ECF No. 41-1 at pp. 3-4,
SS
14-15. (Affidavit of Doph Druckman, M.D.).
Judd has been advised that the consultation is for evaluation purposes only, but ifit is determined
that he requires GID treatment, he will receive it. Id., p. 4,,-r,-r15-16.
2
That conversation occurred one week after Judd filed this lawsuit.
3
Defendants' motion to seal Exhibit 1, attached to ECF No. 14 (ECF No. 15) shall be granted.
2
Nothing more is constitutionally
required.
For reasons set forth herein and in the
previous memorandum, defendants are entitled to summary judgment.
A separate order shall be
entered in accordance with this memorandum, and the case shall be closed.
Date:
"*~
. Frederick Motz
United States District Judge
}.~.L;.l d .~:~,.
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?