KOUKOS et al v. CHESTER COUNTY et al

Filing 21

ORDER THAT THE 11 MOTION IS GRANTED WITH RESPECT TO PLAINTIFFS EIGHTH AMENDMENT CLAIMS AGAINST CORRECTIONAL DOE 1, CORRECTIONAL DOE 7, AND MCFADDEN AND PHILLIPS, IN BOTH THEIR OFFICIAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES; THE MOTION IS DENIED WITH RESPECT T O PLAINTIFFS EIGHTH AMENDMENT CLAIMS AGAINST CORRECTIONAL DOES 26; THE MOTION IS GRANTED WITH RESPECT TO PLAINTIFFS MONELL CLAIMS PREMISED ON ALLEGED POLICIES OF LIMITING MEDICAL CARE DUE TO FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND DELIBERATELY IGNORING MEDICAL REQUESTS FROM OPIATE ADDICTS; THE MOTION IS DENIED WITH RESPECT TO PLAINTIFFS MONELL CLAIMS PREMISED ON AN ALLEGED FAILURE TO ESTABLISH POLICIES REGARDING THE MEDICAL CARE OF INMATES UNDERGOING OPIATE DETOXIFICATION, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GERALD J. PAPPERT ON 2/7/17. 2/8/17 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (va, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CHRISTOPHER KOUKOS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 16-4602

v.
CHESTER COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER

AND NOW, this 7th day of February, 2017, upon consideration of the motion to dismiss
filed by Defendants Chester County, McFadden, Phillips and Correctional Does 1–7 (ECF No.
11), and Plaintiffs’ response in opposition (ECF No. 13), it is hereby ORDERED that the motion
is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part in accordance with the following:
1. The motion is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiffs’ Eighth Amendment claims against
Correctional Doe 1, Correctional Doe 7, and McFadden and Phillips, in both their official
and individual capacities;
2. The motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiffs’ Eighth Amendment claims against
Correctional Does 2–6;
3. The motion is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiffs’ Monell claims premised on alleged
policies of limiting medical care due to financial considerations and deliberately ignoring
medical requests from opiate addicts;
4. The motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiffs’ Monell claims premised on an alleged
failure to establish policies regarding the medical care of inmates undergoing opiate
detoxification, an alleged policy of ignoring medical directives of outside doctors and an

26

alleged failure to train correctional officers in identifying and handling inmates
undergoing opiate detoxification.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gerald J. Pappert
GERALD J. PAPPERT, J.

27