Case Law Cleveland v. Gautreaux

Cleveland v. Gautreaux

Document Cited Authorities (89) Cited in (11) Related

Amy E. Newsom, Newsom Law Firm, LLC, Franz Nicholas Borghardt, Franz N. Borghardt, Attorney at Law, LLC, Baton Rouge, LA, for Plaintiffs.

Mary G. Erlingson, Tara Lynn Johnston, Catherine S. St. Pierre, Lee J. Ledet, Erlingson Banks, PLLC, John Swanner, Seale, Smith, Zuber & Barnette, Arthur H. Andrews, Baton Rouge, LA, for Defendants.

ORDER AND RULING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS
JOHN W. deGRAVELLES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

I. INTRODUCTION

Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss ("First MTD"), (Doc. 7), filed by two natural defendants—Sheriff Sid J. Gautreaux III ("Gautreaux"), Sheriff of East Baton Rouge Parish, and Lieutenant Colonel Dennis Grimes ("Grimes") (collectively, "Natural Defendants"),1 Warden of East Baton Rouge Parish Prison ("EBRPP")—and the Motion to Dismiss ("Second MTD"), (Doc. 8), filed an artificial defendant—Prison Medical Services ("PMS"), a division of the City of Baton Rouge/Parish of East Baton Rouge ("City/Parish"). Mr. Paul A. Cleveland ("Cleveland"), Mr. Paris LeBlanc ("LeBlanc"), and Ms. Mindy Capello ("Capello") (collectively, "Plaintiffs") have responded to the First MTD with the Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss ("Opposition to First MTD"), (Doc. 13), and the Second MTD with the Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss ("Opposition to Second MTD"), (Doc. 11). Defendants supported the First MTD with the Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss ("Reply in Support of First MTD"), (Doc. 21), and the Reply Memorandum to Plaintiffs' Opposition to the City of Baton Rouge/Parish of East Baton Rouge's Motion to Dismiss ("Reply in Support of Second MTD"), (Doc. 26). Having reviewed the papers filed by the Natural Defendants and PMS (collectively, "Defendants") and Plaintiffs (collectively, "Parties"), related briefing, and applicable law, for the reason more fully explained below, this Court DENIES the First and Second MTDs.

II. BACKGROUND

A. RELEVANT FACTS2

On or about September 19, 2014, Cleveland, "who had a significant history of psychiatric illness, including diagnosis of Bi-Polar Disorder," made a threat, recanted minutes later, against a local judge in front of an employee at the Clerk's office for the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Baton Rouge. (Doc. 45 at 2; Doc. 1 at 2.) On that same day, on the basis of his explicit threat, a warrant for Cleveland's arrest issued, and Cleveland was arrested at his home in Donaldsonville, Louisiana. (Doc. 45 at 2; Doc. 1 at 2.) Booked that night into the Ascension Parish Prison, Cleveland was transferred to EBRPP on September 20, 2014. (Doc. 45 at 2; Doc. 1 at 2.) Gautreaux and Grimes allegedly served as EBRPP's "official policy makers." (Doc. 45 at 2; Doc. 1 at 2.) PMS, in turn, provided medical services to EBRPP's inmates, "operat[ing] the facility ... [therein] pursuant to a contract with ... Gautreaux." (Doc. 45 at 3; Doc. 1 at 3.) Gautreux and Grimes, Plaintiffs claim, "were responsible for providing inmates with adequate medical treatment." (Doc. 45 at 3; Doc. 1 at 3.)

At intake, Cleveland allegedly advised prison officials of his numerous health problems, including suicidal thoughts, bipolar disorder, diabetes, high blood pressure, spinal stenosis, leg and ankle trouble, and peripheral artery disease. (Doc. 45 at 3; Doc. 1 at 3.) Later that day, LeBlanc, Cleveland's daughter, "phoned prison officials and spoke to [Ms.] Linda Ottesen [‘Ottesen’]," "a supervisor with the prison medical department." (Doc. 45 at 3; Doc. 1 at 3.) Allegedly, she "explained all of ... Cleveland's medical conditions, and medications to ... Ottesen and ... provided the name of Cleveland's primary care physician and pharmacy." (Doc. 45 at 4; Doc. 1 at 4.)

Two days later, Cleveland spoke to his son and complained "that he was on suicide watch, had no clothes or bedding, was freezing and had not received any of his medications." (Doc. 45 at 4; Doc. 1 at 4.) Afterward, during a meeting with an EBRPP social worker, Cleveland recapped his medical history, telling of his attempted suicide, diagnosis for major depression, and fourteen prior surgeries. (Doc. 45 at 4; Doc. 1 at 4.) Of particular relevance to the present dispute, Cleveland added that he could not "get to pill call" without a wheelchair. (Doc. 45 at 4; Doc. 1 at 4.) On September 22, 2015, in a conversation with Ottesen, LeBlanc again substantiated her father's history, claiming that Cleveland had been "in mental health facilities 4 times and had tried to commit suicide twice." (Doc. 45 at 4; Doc. 1 at 4.) In these early days, however, no wheelchair was provided, and Cleveland's medical files were not requested. (Doc. 1 at 3-5; Doc. 45 at 3-5.)

On September 26, 2014, Cleveland again spoke to his daughter. (Doc. 45 at 4; Doc. 1 at 4.) According to LeBlanc, he complained of chest pains and shortness of breath and told her "that he was shackled, on suicide watch, and being denied access to his medication because he was unable to walk far enough for pill call." (Doc. 45 at 4; Doc. 1 at 4.) LeBlanc immediately called Ottesen, requesting that her father be transported to Our Lady of the Lake Hospital. (Doc. 45 at 4-5; Doc. 1 at 4.) Thereupon, Ottesen "assured her that ... Cleveland was getting his medication and would be seen by a doctor." (Doc. 45 at 5; Doc. 1 at 4.) Despite these promises, Cleveland's family "obtained a prescription from his primary care physician for a wheelchair and provided the prescription to the prison medical department." (Doc. 45 at 5; Doc. 1 at 5.) Doctor Charles Bridges refused to honor these prescriptions, and EBRPP staff accordingly refused to accept an actual wheelchair delivered by Plaintiffs own son. (Doc. 45 at 5; Doc. 1 at 5.) In response, LeBlanc called Grimes to report her father's difficulties, but Grimes "informed ... LeBlanc that he had no control over prison medical services and that there was nothing he could do about the situation." (Doc. 45 at 5; Doc. 1 at 5.) On October 1, 2014, Cleveland's brother called Ottesen, reiterating his family's concerns over his brother's care. (Doc. 45 at 5; Doc. 1 at 5.)

Meanwhile, during his incarceration, Cleveland repeatedly advised EBRPP officials of his complaints. From October 2 to October 5, 2014, he completed three medical request forms regarding his heart problems. (Doc. 45 at 6; Doc. 1 at 6.) On October 14, 2014, to no avail, he complained of headaches and his need for both surgery and a wheelchair. (Doc. 45 at 6; Doc. 1 at 6.) On October 16 and 17, 2014, Cleveland once more requested a wheelchair, as he could not otherwise "not get his medication." (Doc. 45 at 6; Doc. 1 at 6.) LeBlanc too echoed these concerns on October 17. (Doc. 45 at 6; Doc. 1 at 6.)

On October 19, 2014, Cleveland visited with an EBRPP nurse. (Doc. 45 at 7; Doc. 1 at 7.) Apparently, this nurse noted Cleveland's shortness of breath but did no more than place him on suicide watch due to his seemingly "bizarre and abnormal behavior." (Doc. 45 at 7; Doc. 1 at 7.) Seen by a nurse on October 20, 2014, for his chest pains, he again requested a wheelchair. (Doc. 45 at 7; Doc. 1 at 7.) Around that time, Cleveland's brother once more called to convey his family's increasing worries. (Doc. 45 at 7; Doc. 1 at 7.) On October 21, 2014, Grimes himself reached out to EBRPP's medical department, apparently questioning "why Cleveland was still in lockdown if he had been taken off of suicide watch." (Doc. 45 at 7; Doc. 1 at 7.) A "glitch in the paperwork" was blamed by the unnamed EBRPP official. (Doc. 45 at 7; Doc. 1 at 7.)

Subsequently, Cleveland's condition seemingly worsened, his complaints oft-conveyed to the employees of EBRPP and PMS. On October 22 and 23, 2014, he was seen for an emergency by a prison medical department nurse due to chest, neck, leg, and back pain. (Doc. 45 at 8; Doc. 1 at 8.) When he again asked for a wheelchair on October 28, 2014, he was instead scheduled to see a psychiatrist. (Doc. 45 at 8; Doc. 1 at 8.) Finally seen by a physician on October 29, 2014, Cleveland was subjected to an echocardiogram, and blood work was ordered. (Doc. 45 at 8; Doc. 1 at 8.) Although the echocardiogram was abnormal,3 no medical response was forthcoming. (Doc. 45 at 8; Doc. 1 at 8.)

Then, on November 10, 2014, Cleveland endured two separate medical emergencies. (Doc. 45 at 8; Doc. 1 at 8.) Rather than provide Cleveland with treatment, EBRPP confined him to "a single cell." (Doc. 45 at 9; Doc. 1 at 9.) Later that November day, Cleveland telephoned LeBlanc and "told her he was having a heart attack"; LeBlanc then called Grimes with this information. (Doc. 45 at 9; Doc. 1 at 9.) Thus, on November 11, 2014, LeBlanc spoke with one more employee of EBRPP's medical department. (Doc. 45 at 9; Doc. 1 at 9.) Though this official revealed that Cleveland's echocardiogram had been abnormal and though LeBlanc thereupon "begged" for her father's transfer to Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center, Cleveland remained at EBRPP. (Doc. 45 at 9; Doc. 1 at 9.)

Sometime after Cleveland was allegedly tazed and slammed into the cell door by three defendants, on November 12, 2014, Cleveland "was found unresponsive in his cell." (Doc. 45 at 9; Doc. 1 at 9.) "He was not breathing, cold to the touch, and could not be revived." (Doc. 45 at 9; Doc. 1 at 9.) As his children tell it, he "died naked on the concrete floor in Cell 10 of Cellblock A1 of the EBRPP after being tazed during a heart attack," his physical and mental problems well known but disregarded. (Doc. 45 at 10; Doc. 1 at 8.)

Based on this alleged chain of conduct, Plaintiffs sued Defendants for sundry violations. Counts one, two, and three focus on Cleveland's general conditions of confinement ("Confinement Claim"); Count Four states "an episodic act or omission claim" ("Episodic Act Cla...

5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2021
Lewis v. Cain
"... ... do not ordinarily fall within the scope of the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act.'" 537 On the other hand, as the Court noted in Cleveland v ... Gautreaux : Despite this body of law, however, a contrary principle controls in accommodations cases: in case after case, "the Fifth Circuit has ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2023
Adams v. La. Dep't of Corr.
"... ... disabled prisoner to suffer more pain and punishment than ... non-disabled prisoner.” Cleveland v ... Gautreaux , 198 F.Supp.3d 717, 746 (M.D. La. 2016): ... (quoting McCoy v. Tex.Department of Criminal ... Justice , 2006 WL ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2018
Cleveland v. Gautreaux
"..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2017
Furr v. City of Baker
"... ... even if it strikes a savvy judge that actual proof of [the alleged] facts is improbable, and that a recovery is very remote and unlikely." Cleveland v ... Gautreaux , 198 F. Supp. 3d 717, 745 (M.D. La. 2016) (quoting Twombly , 550 U.S. at 556) (internal quotation marks omitted). Once raised as a ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2021
Wright v. Bd. of Comm'rs of the Capital Area Transit Sys.
"... ... See Rec. Doc. No. 23, p. 4 fn 17. 65 See Cleveland v. Gautreaux , 198 F.Supp.3d 717, 736 (M.D. La. 2016). 66 It is likewise undisputed that the City/Parish is responsible for the placement of ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

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
5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2021
Lewis v. Cain
"... ... do not ordinarily fall within the scope of the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act.'" 537 On the other hand, as the Court noted in Cleveland v ... Gautreaux : Despite this body of law, however, a contrary principle controls in accommodations cases: in case after case, "the Fifth Circuit has ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2023
Adams v. La. Dep't of Corr.
"... ... disabled prisoner to suffer more pain and punishment than ... non-disabled prisoner.” Cleveland v ... Gautreaux , 198 F.Supp.3d 717, 746 (M.D. La. 2016): ... (quoting McCoy v. Tex.Department of Criminal ... Justice , 2006 WL ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2018
Cleveland v. Gautreaux
"..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2017
Furr v. City of Baker
"... ... even if it strikes a savvy judge that actual proof of [the alleged] facts is improbable, and that a recovery is very remote and unlikely." Cleveland v ... Gautreaux , 198 F. Supp. 3d 717, 745 (M.D. La. 2016) (quoting Twombly , 550 U.S. at 556) (internal quotation marks omitted). Once raised as a ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana – 2021
Wright v. Bd. of Comm'rs of the Capital Area Transit Sys.
"... ... See Rec. Doc. No. 23, p. 4 fn 17. 65 See Cleveland v. Gautreaux , 198 F.Supp.3d 717, 736 (M.D. La. 2016). 66 It is likewise undisputed that the City/Parish is responsible for the placement of ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

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