Opinion
22-cv-576-bhl
06-16-2022
KENNETH PAYNE, Plaintiff, v. DR. DILIP TANNAN, Defendant.
SCREENING ORDER
BRETT H. LUDWIG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Kenneth Payne, who is currently serving a state prison sentence at Oshkosh Correctional Institution and representing himself, filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. §1983, alleging that the defendant violated his civil rights. This matter comes before the Court on Payne's motion for leave to proceed without prepaying the full filing fee and to screen the complaint.
Motion to Proceed without Prepaying the Filing Fee
Payne has requested leave to proceed without prepaying the full filing fee (in forma pauperis). A prisoner plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis is required to pay the full amount of the $350.00 filing fee over time. See 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(1). Payne has filed a certified copy of his prison trust account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of his complaint, as required under 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(2), and has been assessed and paid an initial partial filing fee of $19.30. The Court will grant Payne's motion for leave to proceed without prepaying the filing fee.
Screening of the Complaint
The Court has a duty to review any complaint in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity, and dismiss any complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised any claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious, ” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b). In screening a complaint, the Court must determine whether the complaint complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and states at least plausible claims for which relief may be granted. To state a cognizable claim under the federal notice pleading system, a plaintiff is required to provide a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that [he] is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). It must be at least sufficient to provide notice to each defendant of what he or she is accused of doing, as well as when and where the alleged actions or inactions occurred, and the nature and extent of any damage or injury the actions or inactions caused.
“The pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require ‘detailed factual allegations,' but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). “The tenet that a court must accept as true all of the allegations contained in a complaint is inapplicable to legal conclusions. Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Id. A complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. at 556. “[T]he complaint's allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Id. at 555 (internal quotations omitted).
Allegations of the Complaint
Payne is an inmate at the Oshkosh Correctional Institution. Dkt. No. 1 at 1. Defendant Dilip Tannan is a doctor at the institution. Id.
On January 16, 2018, Payne submitted a Health Service Request informing Dr. Tannan that he was suffering from a pinched sciatic nerve. Id. at 2. Payne explains that he has had a long history with this nerve condition and he submitted his medical records describing “the measures which should be taken” for the condition. Id. According to Payne, Dr. Tannan ignored these medical records and did not treat the condition. Id. at 2-3. As a result, Payne has been in constant pain since and he has had to receive two surgeries to treat his leg pain. Id. at 3. Following the second surgery, on September 21, 2021, Payne's surgeon told him that he now has a “significant life-time injury” and that he likely will not be able to walk normally for the rest of his life. Id. Payne will apparently need an “AFO” for life to prevent further muscle denervation and eversion. Id. For relief, he seeks monetary damages. Id. at 4.
The Court's Analysis
“To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. §1983, a plaintiff must allege that he or she was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, and that this deprivation occurred at the hands of a person or persons acting under the color of state law.” D.S. v. E. Porter Cty. Sch. Corp., 799 F.3d 793, 798 (7th Cir. 2015) (citing Buchanan-Moore v. Cty. of Milwaukee, 570 F.3d 824, 827 (7th Cir. 2009)).
To state an Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim, Payne must allege that (1) he suffered from an objectively serious medical condition; and (2) the defendant was subjectively deliberately indifferent to that condition. Petties v. Carter, 836 F.3d 722, 727-28 (7th Cir. 2016). “A medical need is sufficiently serious if the plaintiff's condition ‘has been diagnosed by a physician as mandating treatment or . . . is so obvious that even a lay person would perceive the need for a doctor's attention.'” Roe v. Elyea, 631 F.3d 843 857 (7th Cir. 2011) (quoting Greeno v. Daley, 414 F.3d 645, 653 (7th Cir. 2005)). The condition does not need to be life-threatening to be serious; it needs only to be “a condition that would result in further significant injury or unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain” if not addressed. Gayton v. McCoy, 593 F.3d 610, 620 (7th Cir. 2010). A plaintiff must also allege that the prison official's choices “were so ‘significant a departure from accepted professional standards or practices' that it is questionable whether they actually exercised professional judgment.” Stallings v. Liping Zhang, 607 Fed.Appx. 591, 593 (7th Cir. 2015) (quoting Pyles v. Fahim, 771 F.3d 403, 409 (7th Cir. 2014)).
Payne's pinched sciatica nerve is a serious medical condition because it caused significant pain. Dr. Tannan's alleged failure to treat the condition exacerbated the condition and ultimately required two corrective surgeries. Even with the two surgeries, Payne alleges that he will likely never walk normally again and that he will need medical instruments to help him walk for the rest of this life. Based on these allegations, the Court can reasonably infer that Dr. Tannan's conduct was such a significant a departure from accepted professional standards or practices that it is questionable whether he actually exercised professional judgment. Payne may therefore proceed with an Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against Dr. Tannan with respect to his pinched sciatica nerve and resulting leg pain and injuries.
Conclusion
The Court finds that Payne may proceed with an Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against Dr. Tannan with respect to his pinched sciatica nerve and resulting leg pain and injuries.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Payne's motion for leave to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee (Dkt. No. 2) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to an informal service agreement between the Wisconsin Department of Justice and this Court, copies of the complaint and this order are being electronically sent today to the Wisconsin Department of Justice for service on Dr. Tannan.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the informal service agreement between the Wisconsin Department of Justice and this Court, Dr. Tannan shall file a responsive pleading to the complaint within sixty days of receiving electronic notice of this order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the agency having custody of Payne shall collect from his institution trust account the $330.70 balance of the filing fee by collecting monthly payments from Payne's prison trust account in an amount equal to 20% of the preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's trust account and forwarding payments to the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(2). The payments shall be clearly identified by the case name and number assigned to this action. If Payne is transferred to another institution, the transferring institution shall forward a copy of this Order along with Payne's remaining balance to the receiving institution.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties may not begin discovery until after the Court enters a scheduling order setting deadlines for discovery and dispositive motions.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs who are inmates at Prisoner E-Filing Program institutions must submit all correspondence and case filings to institution staff, who will scan and e-mail documents to the Court. The Prisoner E-Filing Program is mandatory for all inmates of Green Bay Correctional Institution, Waupun Correctional Institution, Dodge Correctional Institution, Wisconsin Secure Program Facility, Columbia Correctional Institution, and Oshkosh Correctional Institution. Plaintiffs who are inmates at all other prison facilities must submit the original document for each filing to the Court to the following address:
Office of the Clerk
United States District Court
Eastern District of Wisconsin
362 United States Courthouse
517 E. Wisconsin Avenue
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202PLEASE DO NOT MAIL ANYTHING DIRECTLY TO THE COURT'S CHAMBERS. It will only delay the processing of the matter.
Payne is further advised that failure to make a timely submission may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute. In addition, the parties must notify the Clerk of Court of any change of address. Failure to do so could result in orders or other information not being timely delivered, thus affecting the legal rights of the parties.
Enclosed is a guide prepared by court staff to address common questions that arise in cases filed by prisoners. Entitled “Answers to Prisoner Litigants' Common Questions, ” this guide contains information that Payne may find useful in prosecuting this case.