United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division
T. Neff United States District Judge.
a civil rights action brought by a state prisoner under 42
U.S.C. § 1983. The action initially was filed in the
Eastern District of Michigan. That court dismissed two
parties located in the Eastern District and transferred the
remainder of the case to this Court based on venue
considerations. (See Op. & Order, ECF No. 3,
PageID.41-48.) Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub.
L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996) (PLRA), the Court is
required to dismiss any prisoner action brought under federal
law if the complaint is frivolous, malicious, fails to state
a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary
relief from a defendant immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A; 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c).
The Court must read Plaintiff's pro se complaint
indulgently, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520
(1972), and accept Plaintiff's allegations as true,
unless they are clearly irrational or wholly incredible.
Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992).
Applying these standards, the Court will dismiss
Plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim
against Defendant Randel. The Court will serve the complaint
against Defendants Aiken, Grahn, Nicholason, and Corizon,
is presently incarcerated with the Michigan Department of
Corrections (MDOC) at the Richard A. Handlon Correctional
Facility (MTU) in Ionia, Ionia County, Michigan. The events
about which he complains occurred at that facility and the
Michigan Reformatory (RMI) in Ionia, Ionia County, Michigan.
Plaintiff sues RMI Nurse Practitioner Corey Grahn; RMI Nurses
Surbine Aiken and (unknown) Randel; MTU Sergeant (unknown)
Nicholason; and several unknown health care staff
employed at RMI and MTU (Unknown Parties #1).
alleges that he suffers from a seizure disorder and that he
has or previously had a medical accommodation detail
requiring that he be housed in a first-floor cell with a
bottom-bunk assignment. According to Plaintiff, in 2016, he
was being housed on an upper floor. After complaining to
unnamed officials proved fruitless, Plaintiff wrote a
grievance on October 18, 2016, asking that his medical
details be honored, because his seizure disorder placed his
life at risk. Defendant Aiken responded to the grievance and
“intentionally falsified the medical facts regarding
the Plaintiff, facts that would show that Plaintiff did in
fact have a medical special accommodation detail for ground
floor housing and bottom bunk.” (Compl., ECF No. 1,
PageID.4.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Aiken either knew
or should have known that Plaintiff had these medical
accommodations. Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant
Aiken was grossly negligent in failing to review
Plaintiff's entire medical record and either grossly
negligent or deliberately indifferent to the potential
suffering caused by her misrepresentation about
Plaintiff's medical accommodation detail.
December 7, 2016, while visiting with a psychologist,
Plaintiff experienced a seizure. He lost consciousness and
struck his face and head on an unknown object. He suffered
bruises on his head and the side of his face, and he
experienced severe pain and confusion upon waking. Plaintiff
was seen by Defendant Grahn. Plaintiff told Defendant Grahn
about his medical history of seizures both before and after
incarceration. He also told Grahn that his medical
accommodations had been denied. In addition, Plaintiff
explained to Grahn all of the symptoms he was suffering, both
from the injury and from his seizures. Those symptoms
included confusion, pain, and problems with his vision,
focusing ability and concentration. Plaintiff further
explained his fear of falling down the stairs during a
seizure. He asked Defendant Grahn to place him back on his
anti-seizure medication. Grahn refused, saying, “No,
no, no, you must have a few more seizures so we can verify
and monitor how many and how often you are having the
seizures; maybe after a few more seizures.”
(Id., PageID.6.) Plaintiff complains that Defendant
Grahn ignored the risks Plaintiff faced from further
seizures, failed to review Plaintiff's medical file,
failed to examine Plaintiff's injuries, and provided no
medical treatment or advice.
subsequently sent a series of kites to health services,
complaining of blurred vision, lack of focus, lack of
balance, nausea, and severe headaches. Plaintiff alleges that
the symptoms were conveyed to Defendant Grahn and placed on
his health care request. He was not seen again by health
December 20, 2016, as Plaintiff was walking to school, he
began to feel dizzy and faint at the top of the unit stairs.
He had a seizure and fell down the stairs. In the fall,
Plaintiff seriously injured his back. When he was taken to
health services, he was given only ice and aspirin. He was
provided no accommodations, and no effort was made to
determine what dose of anti-seizure medication was needed.
December 21, 2016, Plaintiff informed Defendant Nicholason
that he was in severe pain, could hardly see, and had
blinding white light in his vision. Nicholason called health
care, and Unknown Parties #1 refused to see Plaintiff because
they were busy.
the time of his complaints about health care, Plaintiff
received his meals in his room as part of his accommodation.
Defendant Grahn told Plaintiff that he was a
“headache” and discontinued the meals, forcing
Plaintiff to walk to the chow hall in his debilitated state.
Grahn then used his position to have Plaintiff transferred to
4, 2017, as Plaintiff was walking to the phone, he felt a
sharp pain in his back and then his legs collapsed under him.
Two nurses came, but Defendant Nicholason laughingly told the
nurses that Plaintiff was faking his problem. Nicholason
jerked on Plaintiff's arm until he could pull him up, and
he threw Plaintiff into a wheelchair.
actions caused further injury to Plaintiff's back,
necessitating surgery to place a “Caliber
L-Fusion” cage in Plaintiff's back on November 12,
2017. Plaintiff now walks with a walker and cannot stand to
remaining allegations appear related to his post-surgery care
at Duane Waters Hospital and the Defendants dismissed by the
Eastern District of Michigan. Plaintiff may, however, intend
to allege ongoing failures to provide pain medication and
retaliation for filing grievances after he returned to MTU.
Plaintiff alleges that all Defendants ...