Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Watts v. Ramos

June 25, 2009


The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge


Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1). The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).

Plaintiff names the following as defendants: Ramos, Murray, Gibson, Casey, Reid, Thomson, and Prince. He alleges that defendants were deliberately indifferent to a serious medical need, in violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment. Specifically, he clams that he has a well-documented medical file indicating various and serious medical needs, including "heart and knee concerns." According to plaintiff, his file reveals that, as early as 2006, his medical problems precluded an upper bunk or upper tier cell assignment. He states that documents from 2007 and 2008 confirm this limitation. Plaintiff also states that his "chest pains" are well-documented and preclude him from being subject to any "unreasonable stressful situation."

Petitioner alleges that, when he attempted to have prison staff follow medical "chronos" for a lower bunk and lower tier cell assignment, he was "ignored, put-off, or told to wait." Specifically, he claims that defendant Murray, who was the "housing sergeant," was aware that he was being housed in an upper bunk on an upper tier "as early as 12/7/06." He states that, on December 8, 2006, he sent defendant Gibson a request for interview, informing him of the situation. While plaintiff states that his request was ignored at first, he was eventually given a lower bunk cell assignment, but remained on the upper tier. Plaintiff states that he next notified defendant Ramos, who is the "housing lieutenant," of the problem. He adds that defendants Murray and Gibson were "always informed of Plaintiff needing a lower-tier, especially due to 'climbing and descending' stairs was 'dangerous and risky' due to his 'knee medical concerns.'" (emphasis in original). According to plaintiff, he informed defendant Thomson via an inmate grievance of his need for a lower tier cell assignment "to no avail."

He claims that defendants Ramos, Murray, Gibson, and Thomson all had "advance knowledge of Plaintiff being housed on the 'upper tier'" and that they all knew of the "risk to a seriously ill inmate, being called 'upstairs.'"

Next, plaintiff alleges that, on June 18, 2008, he experienced chest pains, dizziness, and difficulty breathing. According to plaintiff here is no way for inmates in their cells to communication with officers in the control towers and that inmates must "yell between a crack in their door, until control tower hears them." When plaintiff began experiencing chest pains on June 18, 2008, he and his cellmate took turns yelling to defendant Reid, who was the officer in the control tower at the time. Plaintiff states that defendant Reid "came to his control tower window" and "partially opened Plaintiff's door" whereupon plaintiff informed defendant Reid that he needed medical attention. Plaintiff alleges that defendant Reid's response was: "Wait until yard release."

When he was eventually released to the yard, plaintiff went to the dayroom "because he felt insecure walking outside in his condition." Plaintiff states that he again asked defendant Reid to summon medical personnel, but that defendant Reid ordered plaintiff to return to his cell. According to plaintiff, another inmate overheard defendant Reid say: "The only way you're leaving this building is in a stretcher." Plaintiff adds that, by 12:30 p.m., he was "yelling for the tower staff to call medical" and that, a short time later, another inmate in the unit "saw no movement" from plaintiff. This inmate then informed defendant Reid of the situation but defendant Reid said that plaintiff would have to wait until the prison nurse arrived on her "pill call rounds." Plaintiff claims that, when the nurse -- defendant Prince -- arrived, she did not go to the plaintiff's cell. Without further detail, plaintiff alleges that defendant Prince "was aware of Plaintiff's condition and improper cell confinement."

Plaintiff states that, as defendant Prince was making her rounds, defendant Reid opened his cell door. He states that, while descending the stairs from the upper tier in order to obtain medical attention, his knees weakened and he "rolled half-way down the stairs, where he landed on the lower-tier floor -- 'unconscious.'" According to plaintiff, it was only then that defendant Reid spoke to defendant Prince to inform her of a "fallen inmate." Plaintiff adds that, even though he was laying unconscious on the floor, "it still took awhile before the alarm was sounded." Plaintiff claims that inmates who witnessed the situation described defendant Prince's "manner as 'indifferent.'" Additional medical staff eventually arrived and plaintiff was put on a stretcher to be taken to an outside hospital. It was later determined that plaintiff had suffered a heart attack.

Plaintiff claims that defendant Casey was the "floor officer" on June 18, 2008, and that he was aware of plaintiff's medical problem but "failed to get emergency care...." Without stating how defendant Casey was aware of plaintiff's need for a lower tier cell assignment, plaintiff also stated that defendant Casey "did not correct this continuous violation."

The complaint appears to state a cognizable claim for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). If the allegations are proven, plaintiff has a reasonable opportunity to prevail on the merits of this action. The court, therefore, finds that service is appropriate and will direct service by the U.S. Marshal without pre-payment of costs. Plaintiff is informed, however, that this action cannot proceed further until plaintiff complies with this order. Plaintiff is warned that failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of the action.

See Local Rule 11-110.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The court authorizes service on the following defendant(s): RAMOS, MURRAY, GIBSON, CASEY, REID, THOMSON, and PRINCE;

2. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff one USM-285 form for each defendant identified above, one summons, an instruction ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.