Edmundson v. Flathead County Sheriff Depatment et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8 in full. All claims against Dr. Dusing and the Flathead County Sheriff's Department are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. All claims against Nurse Tammy except those arising from her alleged denial of Tylenol on June 14 and 15, 2012, are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 1/3/2014. Mailed to Christensen. (TAG, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

RODNEY A. EDMUNDSON,

CV 13-32-M-DLC

Plaintiff,
ORDER
vs.

FILED

FLATHEAD COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT, DOCTOR DUSING,
and TAMMY (last name unknown),

JAN 03 2014
Clerk, u.s District Court
District Of Montana
Missoula

. Defendants.

Plaintiff Rodney Edmundson raises state and federal claims alleging
Defendants denied him pain medication while he was incarcerated in the Flathead
County Detention Center. United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch
reviewed Edmundson's initial complaint, and after finding that it failed to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted, gave Plaintiff the opportunity to file an
amended complaint. Judge Lynch reviewed the amended complaint as required by
28 U.S.C. §§ 1915, 1915A, and issued Findings and Recommendations on October
15,2013. Judge Lynch recommends the Court dismiss with prejudice all claims
against Dr. Dusing and the Flathead County Sheriffs Department, as well as all
claims against Nurse Tammy except those arising from her alleged denial of

1

Tylenol on June 14 and 15,2012. (Doc. 8.)
Plaintiff timely objected, and is therefore entitled to de novo review of the
specified findings or recommendations to which he objects. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The portions of the findings and recommendations not specifically objected to will
be reviewed for clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach.,

Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). For the reasons stated below, the Court
adopts Judge Lynch's Findings and Recommendations in full. Because the parties
are familiar with the procedural and factual background of this case, it will not be
restated here.
Plaintiff objects "to all adverse rulings in the Findings and
Recommendations." (Doc. 9 at 1.) However, the Court finds that because he makes
no further mention of Judge Lynch's findings and recommendations regarding the
Flathead County Sheriffs Office, and only passing references to Nurse Tammy, he
failed to specifically object to the findings and recommendations regarding those
Defendants. Accordingly, the Court has reviewed those findings and
recommendations for clear error, and finds none. All claims against the Flathead
County Sheriffs Department and all claims against Nurse Tammy except those
arising from her alleged denial of Tylenol on June 14 and 15,2012 will be
dismissed.
2

Plaintiff specifically objected to Judge Lynch's dispensation of his claims
against Doctor Dusing, which the Court will review de novo.
To state a claim for failure to provide medical care, a prisoner must allege a
defendant's acts or omissions were "sufficiently harmful to evidence a deliberate
indifference to serious medical needs." Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106
(1976). Judge Lynch found that Edmundson only alleged that Dr. Dusing was
responsible for medical care at the detention center and that he prescribed
Edmundson pain medication on June 23, 2012. Judge Lynch correctly stated that
Edmundson does not allege that Dr. Dusing was aware of his issues prior to June
23,2012. As a result, Judge Lynch concluded that Edmundson's allegations are
"insufficient to establish deliberate indifference or even negligence." (Doc. 8 at 2.)
As a preliminary matter, in his objections, Edmundson unnecessarily
addresses the severity of his injuries. Judge Lynch's conclusion was based on
deliberate indifference, not the seriousness of Edmundson's medical needs.
Edmundson's objections consist almost entirely of conclusory statements
akin to those that appear in both versions of his complaint, and which Judge Lynch
found insufficient to establish deliberate indifference or negligence. Edmundson
states, without providing any specific factual support, that Dr. Dusing "knew of,
and had prior knowledge of the plaintiff s debilitating medical condition," (Doc. 9
3

at 3), and that he "knew that the failure to treat the plaintiffs pre-existing medical
condition could result in further significant injury" (Id. at 4). These statements are
too little, too late.
Despite Judge Lynch's specific instructions for what Edmundson's amended
complaint must include, (Doc. 4 at 10), Edmundson only alleged that Dr. Dusing
was responsible for medical care at the detention center, and that he prescribed
Edmundson pain medication on June 23,2012. The amended complaint makes no
allegation that Dr. Dusing was even aware of Edmundson's issues prior to June
23,2012.
The Court recognizes that a pro se complaint "must be held to less stringent
standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers." Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S.
89,94 (2007). However, even under this more relaxed standard, Edmundson's
amended complaint simply does not contain sufficient facts that, when accepted as
true, state a claim for deliberate indifference or negligence that is plausible on its
face. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
There being no clear error in Judge Lynch's remaining findings and
recommendations, IT IS ORDERED:
1. Judge Lynch's Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 8) are ADOPTED in fulL

2. All claims against Dr. Dusing and the Flathead County Sheriffs Department are

4

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
3. All claims against Nurse Tammy except those arising from her alleged denial of
Tylenol on June 14 and 15,2012 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

Dated this 3t"'d., day of January, 2014.

Dana L. Christensen, Chief udge
United States District Court

5