Case Law Boykin v. Westchester Cnty. Jail

Boykin v. Westchester Cnty. Jail

Document Cited Authorities (18) Cited in Related

Appearances:

Hugh G. Jasne

Jasne & Florio, L.L.P.

White Plains, New York

Counsel for Plaintiff

John M. Murtagh

Denise M. Cossu

Murtagh, Cossue, Venditti & Castro-Blanco LLP

White Plains, New York

Counsel for Medical Defendants

Loren Zeitler

Westchester County Attorney's Office White Plains, New York

Counsel for County Defendants

OPINION & ORDER

CATHY SEIBEL, U.S.D.J.

Before the Court are the motion to dismiss of Defendants Nurse Practitioner (“N.P.”) Zoeth, N.P. Lisa Palmieri, Medical Supervisor Dr. Raul Ulloa, Wellpath Inc., Correct Care Solutions Inc., and New York Correct Care Solutions, LLC (collectively, the Medical Defendants), (ECF No. 25), and the motion to dismiss of Defendants Westchester County Jail, Westchester Department of Correction, Commissioner Joseph K. Spano, Westchester County (the “County”), Westchester County Executive George Latimer, Corrections Officer (“C.O.”) D. Martinez, and Sergeant (“Sgt.”) Price (collectively, the “County Defendants,” and together with the Medical Defendants, the Defendants), (ECF No. 33). For the following reasons, both motions are GRANTED.

I. BACKGROUND

I accept as true the facts, but not the conclusions, set forth in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 17 (“FAC”).)

A. Facts

Plaintiff alleges that the County and its Department of Correction did not properly maintain the recreation yard at the Westchester County Jail (the Jail), permitting mud to accumulate without removing it or providing warnings or protections. (FAC ¶ 40.) Around 1 p.m. on May 4, 2021, Plaintiff, who at all relevant times was held in the Jail as a pretrial detainee, slipped on mud that had accumulated in the yard, falling and injuring himself. (Id. ¶¶ 32, 62.) After he fell, Plaintiff limped back to his housing unit F-2 and notified Defendant C.O. Martinez. (Id. ¶¶ 64-65.) C.O. Martinez told Plaintiff that he would be seen by the 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. medical shift, and Plaintiff complained, (id. ¶ 66), although the FAC does not provide any details about that complaint. In response, C.O. Martinez ordered Plaintiff to walk to “the old jail clinic,” which was a little more than a quarter-mile from Plaintiff's housing unit. (Id. ¶ 67.) Plaintiff complied with that order and hobbled down the stairs from his housing unit to F-1. (Id. ¶ 68.) After doing so, Plaintiff advised C.O. Martinez that he could not walk anymore, and Martinez called Defendant Sgt. Price, who Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief was the sergeant on duty. (Id.) While Plaintiff was on the floor - and the FAC does not explain how he ended up on the floor - Sgt. Price called for a medical team. (Id. ¶ 69.) Defendants N.P. Zoeth, Nurse Monroe, and Nurse Doe responded. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges that N.P. Zoeth did not examine him but repeatedly told him that [t]here [was] nothing wrong with [him] and that he “d[idn't] want to walk because [he was] lazy.” (Id. ¶ 70.) But N.P. Zoeth then said, [W]e're going to have to send you to the outside hospital for x-rays,” and called someone who Plaintiff alleges on information and belief was Dr. Ulloa, who determined together with N.P. Zoeth that Plaintiff should wait until the next day to receive x-rays, which would be done in the Jail. (Id. ¶¶ 71-72.) Plaintiff was then taken to the Jail's clinic in a wheelchair. (Id. ¶ 73.)

At the clinic, when asked about his pain by unnamed and unidentified medical staff, Plaintiff responded that his pain was “a 10 out of 10.” (Id. ¶ 74.) The medical staff then wrapped Plaintiff's right ankle in an ace bandage, gave Plaintiff crutches and told him to use them, provided him with two Motrin tablets, and ordered him to return to his housing unit F-2. (Id. ¶ 75.) The crutches provided to Plaintiff were uneven and too long, and the unnamed and unidentified medical staff did not properly adjust them or provide Plaintiff any instructions for use. (Id. ¶ 76; see id. ¶¶ 75, 82, 97, 755.) Plaintiff alleges that it would have been a violation of an unspecified Jail policy had he removed any hardware from the crutches to adjust them, so he had to use them improperly by standing on his “tippy toes” and swinging the crutches outward. (Id. ¶¶ 75-76, 83.) While the FAC alleges that it “clearly should have been readily determined by any medical professional” that the crutches were too tall, (id. ¶ 82), Plaintiff does not allege that he complained to any of the Defendants about any issues with the crutches or that any of the Defendants provided him the crutches.

When Plaintiff arrived back at the F-2 housing unit, he spoke with Sgt. Price who advised him that he should not be upstairs with crutches. (Id. ¶ 77.) Plaintiff requested to be moved downstairs, and Sgt. Price responded that that order would need to come from medical. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief that Sgt. Price did not follow-up or address any medical issues that Plaintiff faced. (Id. ¶ 78.) At 6 p.m. that day, Plaintiff needed to walk downstairs to receive his medication, but he advised an unnamed C.O. that he could not walk. (Id. ¶ 79.) An unnamed nurse brought Plaintiff his Motrin but told him that he would need to “figure it out for himself” the next day. (Id.) Plaintiff could not sleep due to the severe pain from his injuries, (id. ¶ 80), but the FAC does not allege that Plaintiff notified anyone about this pain.

On or about May 5, 2021, Plaintiff used his crutches to walk down the stairs to get his x-ray. (See id. ¶¶ 81, 83.) Because his crutches were too tall for him, he had to “swing” the crutches to move with them, and when he tried to catch himself with his injured foot, his foot buckled, he heard a pop and a crack, and he fell down the stairs. (Id. ¶¶ 82-83.) A nondefendant C.O. was at the bottom of the stairs with Plaintiff for about fifteen to twenty minutes before he was helped up and brought to get his x-ray. (Id. ¶ 84.) A non-defendant sergeant advised Plaintiff that he would be moved downstairs to F-1, (id.), and ten minutes after returning from the Jail's x-ray, he was advised that he needed outside medical treatment, (id. ¶ 85).

Plaintiff was brought to the hospital, where the doctor unwrapped his bandaged leg and advised Plaintiff that an x-ray had confirmed that his tibia was broken in two places. (Id. ¶ 86.) The hospital provided Plaintiff pain medication and set his leg with a splint, and the doctor advised Plaintiff that his leg might heal without surgery if he could avoid putting weight on it and keep it elevated. (Id. ¶¶ 87-88.)

When Plaintiff returned to the Jail, he met with N.P. Palmieri, who told Plaintiff that a broken leg [wa]sn't serious enough” for him to be housed in the Jail's infirmary and sent him back to F-1 housing, which required Plaintiff to repeatedly walk and place weight on his leg. (Id. ¶ 89.) N.P. Palmieri also berated Plaintiff, repeatedly telling him to “stop whining” and to “suck it up” because Plaintiff was in jail, and threatening him with solitary confinement if he kept complaining about not having proper care. (Id. ¶ 90.) Plaintiff also alleges that N.P. Palmieri “denied Plaintiff needed medical care some of which was performed on the specific orders of Defendant Medical Supervisor Ulloa,” (id. ¶ 94), and that an unnamed individual denied him blankets, allegedly in retaliation for a grievance, (id. ¶ 99). While Plaintiff alleges that he was not provided an item to elevate his leg until three days before his next appointment with the doctor, (id. ¶ 91), the FAC does not allege that Plaintiff requested any items to use for elevation or to whom he made any such requests. At his next appointment, Plaintiff was informed that he had overused and abused his leg, and it would require surgery to repair. (Id. ¶ 91.) The surgery took place approximately 3.5 weeks after the date of his initial fall on the mud. (See id. ¶ 92.) Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief that the surgery required “the installation of [a] metal plate, 8 screws and a rope, [and] 13 stitches taken out on June 25th, 2021.” (Id. ¶ 100.) He also alleges that he now has a long scar across his ankle and calf, as well as torn ligaments and tendons, resulting from the falls and subsequent surgery. (See id. ¶¶ 100-104.)

B. Procedural History

On August 1, 2022, Plaintiff commenced this lawsuit in New York State Supreme Court, Westchester County. (See ECF No. 1-2.) On December 13, 2022, with the consent of the Medical Defendants, the County Defendants timely removed the action to this Court, asserting that Plaintiff's alleged Monell claims fell within this Court's federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. (See ECF No. 1 ¶¶ 1-11; ECF No. 1-4.) On March 8, 2023, the Defendants filed pre-motion letters in anticipation of their motions to dismiss. (ECF Nos. 7, 8.) At the premotion conference, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to amend his Complaint, (see Minute Entry dated May 9, 2023; ECF No. 32-10), and on July 7, 2023, Plaintiff filed the FAC, (ECF No. 17).

The FAC asserts thirteen claims, styled as follows: (1) “Federal...

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex