United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS (Doc. # 18, Doc.
# 24, Doc. # 31) AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANTS
NURSE UNKNOWN RICK AND UNKNOWN PERSON FROM THE BUREAU OF
HEALTH CARE SERVICES
Victoria A. Roberts United States District Judge
Langford (“Langford”) brings this Prisoner Civil
Rights claim against several defendants (collectively,
“Defendants”) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for
violations of his First and Eighth Amendment rights. Langford
claims that by inadequately treating his ingrown toenail,
Defendants showed deliberate indifference in violation of the
Eighth Amendment. Langford also claims that he received a
misconduct ticket in retaliation for his decision not to
allow a prison nurse to operate on his toenail, in violation
of the First Amendment.
groups of Defendants filed separate motions to dismiss. After
the Defendants filed their motions to dismiss, the Court
ordered Langford to either file an amended complaint or
respond to all three motions. Langford filed a response; only
one reply brief was filed. No. motions to dismiss were filed
on behalf of Defendant Unknown Rick, a nurse, and an Unknown
Person from the Bureau of Health Care Services
reasons that follow, all three motions are
GRANTED; Langford's claims are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE against all
Facts of the Case
Medical Treatment For Ingrown Toenail
alleges that on September 16, 2016, he requested medical
attention for an ingrown toenail. Three days later, he was
notified that he had an appointment to both have his toenail
examined and to use the toenail clippers. He met with
“Nurse Unknown Rick, ” who allowed him to use the
toenail clippers. Nurse Rick said he would schedule Langford
to see a doctor. Langford did not get notice of an
appointment, so he sent another request on September 25, 2016
for an appointment, indicating he was in pain and had
difficulty walking. In response to this request, he was
scheduled to see Nurse Cynthia Brzyski
(“Brzyski”) on September 28, 2016. That
appointment was canceled. He sent another request, which
resulted in him seeing Nurse Lisa Wurmlinger
(“Wurmlinger”) on October 7, 2016; she indicated
that she would schedule Langford to see a doctor. [Complaint,
October 14, 2016, Langford was seen by Nurse Practioner Prima
Muzirman (“Muzirman”), who advised him that he
should have the toenail removed. Langford asked Muzirman if
she had such experience; she said she had never removed a
toenail. Langford told Muzirman that he preferred a doctor to
remove his toenail. Id. at 7.
November 2016 and February 2017, Langford alleges that he
made several requests concerning his toenail and went to
several appointments, only to be told they were cancelled
when he arrived. Notably, he says he sent a request stating
that he needed to see a physician to remove his toenail
because he was not going to let an inexperienced medical
provider perform the procedure. He admits he declined a few
appointments to have a medical provider assess his toenail or
to use the toenail clippers, either because his toenail was
already assessed, or because he did not need to use clippers.
Id. at 7-8.
sending a letter inquiring about an appointment for his
toenail, Langford alleges receiving a letter from an Unknown
Person on February 8, 2017. That letter indicated that they
were looking into his concern. Id. at 8.
Prisoner Misconduct Ticket
January 25, 2017, Langford alleges that he was given a pass
to see Muzirman, who examined Langford's ingrown toenail
and said it was due to a fungus. He asked her why she kept
calling him to see her when he was not going to let her
perform any procedures on his toenail. Langford alleges that
Muzirman became angry, and told him to get out of her office.
Muzirman told a custody officer that Langford yelled at her,
and the custody officer - according to Langford - told
Muzirman that Langford could be written up for insolence.
Langford admits he did raise his voice, but he did not
threaten or intimidate Muzirman. He told the custody officer
that the only issue was that he did not want Muzirman to work
on his toenail. Id. at 9-10.
next day, the control center issued Langford a Class II
misconduct for insolence. Langford unsuccessfully appealed
the ticket. Langford later pled guilty to the misconduct.
Langford's Grievances ...