Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
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.

Kitchen v. Corizon Health Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division

January 4, 2018

Michael Andrew Kitchen, Plaintiff,
v.
Corizon Health Inc., et al., Defendants.

          OPINION

          Honorable Paul L. Maloney, Judge

         I. Background and Procedural Posture

         This is a civil rights action brought by a pro se state prisoner under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The suit arises out of the conditions of Plaintiff's confinement at Michigan Reformatory. He alleges that he suffered from an “inexplicable delay in providing and subsequent denial of medical care.” (ECF No. 155 at PageID.1685.) The Court dismissed a number of parties from the suit after conducting an initial screening and ordered service on Corizon Health Incorporated, Corey Grahn, Anthony Croll, Teri Byrne, Heidi Slusher, Unknown Schultz, and Thomas Doyle for Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim and intentional infliction of emotional distress. (ECF Nos. 10, 11.)

         Croll, Byrne, and Slusher work for the Michigan Department of Corrections (for purposes of this opinion, the “MDOC Defendants”).[1] Grahn is employed by Corizon Health Incorporated (together, “the Corizon Defendants”).

         Both the Corizon Defendants and MDOC Defendants have filed dispositive motions. The MDOC defendants seek summary judgment based on a failure to exhaust administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). (ECF No. 110.) Corizon Defendants also seek summary judgment pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) and also seek dismissal of Plaintiff's First Amendment claim pursuant to Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (ECF No. 115.)

         On November 11, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge Phillip J. Green issued a Report & Recommendation (“R & R”). (ECF No. 151.) He recommends that the Corizon Defendants' motion for partial dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) be granted-Judge Green concluded that Plaintiff's claims for ordinary negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, abuse of process and unlawful imprisonment sounded in Michigan medical malpractice, and also that the Corizon Defendants could not be vicariously liable for others' constitutional violations under § 1983. Next, Judge Green recommended that the MDOC Defendants motion for summary judgment be denied because he concluded that Plaintiff had exhausted his administrative remedies as to them. Finally, he recommended that summary judgment be granted to Corizon Health Incorporated for failure to exhaust, but denied as to Grahn. Judge Green also recommended that Plaintiff's state law claims against all Defendants be dismissed under the authority granted by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), 1915A.

         In sum, Judge Green recommended that Plaintiff's claims against the MDOC Defendants and Corizon Defendant Grahn be allowed to proceed under section 1983 on a theory that they were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights.

         Judge Green also filed a separate opinion and related order on November 10 disposing of a smattering of other motions not related to the Defendants' dispositive motions:

. Plaintiffs motion for a protective order (ECF No. 120)
. Plaintiffs motion requesting a “partial delay” of the Court's ruling on the Corizon defendants' dispositive motion pending discovery . . . (ECF No. 123)
. Plaintiffs motion to compel (ECF No. 125)
. the Corizon Defendants' third motion for a teleconference (ECF No. 130)
. the Corizon defendants' motion for a brief extension of time to file responses to plaintiffs motions because the attorney responsible for drafting the responses was ill (ECF No. 131)
. the Corizon defendants' motion for leave to file surreply briefs (ECF No. 143), and . Plaintiffs motion regarding service on defendants ...

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.