Thompson v. Wexford Health Sources Inc.

1

Trevis Thompson, Plaintiff, v. Wexford Health Sources Inc., et al., Defendants.

No. 20 CV 1191

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division

November 19, 2024

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

LINDSAY C. JENKINS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Plaintiff Trevis Thompson filed this lawsuit in February 2020 and filed the operative Third Amended Complaint in December 2022. [Dkt 142.] Count One arises under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive use of force in violation of the Eighth Amendment by Officer Thomas Kelley alone.^[1]Count Two alleges Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) against Officer Kelley and all the remaining Defendants: Wexford Health Sources, Inc.; Dr. Saleh Obaisi; Dr. Christian Okezie; Dr Marlene Henze; LaTanya Williams; Lt. Shantell Scott; Sgt Kara Pronger.^[2]The Defendants have moved for Summary Judgment. [Dkt, 184, 188.] For the reasons explained below, the Wexford Defendants' motion is granted and the IDOC Defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part. The claims pending against Officer Kelley remain for trial.

I. Factual Background^[3]

Thompson was incarcerated at Stateville Correctional Center, where Wexford provided health services to inmates. [Dkt. 198 at ¶¶2, 11.] Dr. Obaisi was Stateville's Medical Director from August 2012 until his death in December 2017. [Id. at ¶ 7.] Dr. Okezie was the Stateville Medical Director until October 2018, when Dr. Henze became the Medical Director. [Id. at ¶¶ 8, 9.] Throughout Thompson's time at Stateville, Williams worked as a Physician's Assistant (PA). [Id. at ¶ 10.]

When Thompson saw Williams in 2011, he reported pain in his groin. [Id. at ¶ 17.] He continued to report rashes and pain in his groin throughout the next few years. [Id. at ¶¶ 18-19.] The parties identify Thompson's first complaint of right hip pain as occurring in a consultation with a nonparty doctor at Stateville in 2016. [Id. at ¶ 23.] When Thompson discussed this hip pain with Dr. Obaisi in February 2017, Dr. Obaisi performed a steroid injection to decrease inflammation and pain. [Id. at ¶ 25.] Thompson complained of continuing hip pain during a visit with Williams in March, and she recommended that he see the Medical Director. [Id. at ¶¶ 26-27.] When Thompson next saw Dr. Obaisi, his complaints centered on testicular pain, and Dr. Obaisi recommended referring him out for treatment. [Id. at ¶¶ 28-29.] In July 2018, Thompson told Williams about continuing pain in his hip. [Id. at ¶ 30.] Thompson later received an x-ray of his right hip. [Id. at ¶ 31.]

In August 2018, Dr. Okezie saw Thompson for the first time and noted that he had complained of pain in his right hip and groin. [Id. at ¶ 32.] Results from the most recent x-ray had not arrived, but Dr. Okezie noted that Thompson's right hip x-ray from 2016 appeared normal. [Id.] Dr. Okezie saw Thompson for the second and last time a few weeks later. [Id. at ¶ 33.] Despite an absence of bone or joint pathology, Dr. Okezie referred Thompson to UIC orthopedics for a consultation “given the length of the complaints for right hip pain.” [Id.]

Thompson saw Dr. Henze for the first time in October 2018. [Id. at ¶ 35.] For further evaluation of his groin and hip pain, Thompson received an MRI at UIC in November 2018, which showed a “Cam-type deformity on the right femoral head/neck junction.” [Id. at ¶¶ 35-36.] Thompson saw Dr. Henze again in January 2019 for a follow-up visit after a December UIC orthopedic appointment. [Id. at ¶ 38.] In response to Thompson's continued pain and newly reported shoulder pain, Dr. Henze prescribed Thompson a low bunk permit and a waist chain. [Id.]

After Thompson received his prescription for a low bunk permit, he was moved to Gallery 10, the top tier. [Dkt. 216 at ¶ 17.] Thompson states that he spoke to Officers Scott and Pronger about his desire to remain in a lower gallery because of his medical condition, but this fact is disputed. Thompson maintains that the two officers responded with threats to move him out of the cell house. [Dkt. 199 at ¶ 10.] Officers Scott and Pronger dispute this, claiming they cannot recall talking to Thompson at all, and they deny making any threats. [Dkt. 199 at ¶ 16; Dkt. 216 at ¶ 17.] It is undisputed that Officers Scott and Pronger were not involved in providing medical care to inmates, and they did not have the power to prescribe gallery or bunk permits. [Dkt. 199 at ¶¶ 13, 19, 20.] It is also undisputed that the Officers had no discretion over gallery, cell, or bunk assignments at Stateville. [Id. at ¶ 20.]

By April 2019, Thompson's pain had not gone away, and Dr. Henze prescribed additional medication and a permit for Thompson to have an egg crate mattress on his bunk. [Dkt. 198 ¶ 40.] When Thompson told Williams that his pain medication was not helping, she switched his prescription. [Id. at ¶ 44.] After a consultation with UIC orthopedics during which UIC recommended surgery for Thompson's right hip, Dr. Henze met with Thompson and prescribed post-surgery physical therapy, an MRI, a low bunk permit, low gallery permit, and renewed pain medication. [Id. at ¶ 46.]

Some key events related to Officer Kelley came next. On November 12, 2019, before heading back to Stateville from an appointment with UIC orthopedics, Officer Kelley went to the inmate holding area of UIC to unlock Thompson's restraints to assist Thompson with going to the bathroom. [Dkt. 199 at ¶ 31.] The parties dispute what happened next. Kelley claims that as he was unlocking Thompson's restraints, Thompson quickly stood up, causing “his leg iron to become caught on an unsecured handcuff, causing Plaintiff to fall forward.” [Id.] Thompson maintains Officer Kelley pulled his arm “while he was still cuffed to the floor which made Plaintiff fall face first.” [Dkt. 216 at ¶ 30.] Thompson maintains he suffered injuries to his face, shoulder, hand, and back as a result of the fall. [Dkt. 199 at ¶ 23.]

Thompson received femoral acetabular surgery on his right hip on January 10, 2020, at UIC Orthopedics. [Dkt. 198 at ¶ 48.] Dr. Henze saw him for a follow-up two weeks later and ordered nursing staff to help him bathe because of his continued pain and difficulty bathing. [Id. at ¶ 49.] After Thompson's surgery, Dr. Henze called Thompson's mother to provide an update on how Thompson was doing. [Id. at ¶ 50.]

II. Legal Standard

Summary judgment is proper where “the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a); see Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, (1986). A genuine issue of material fact exists if “the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986); see also Birch|Rea Partners, Inc. v. Regent Bank, 27 F.4th 1245, 1249 (7th Cir. 2022). The Court “must construe all facts and draw all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.” Majors v. Gen. Elec. Co., 714 F.3d 527, 532 (7th Cir. 2013) (internal quotation omitted). The Court “may not make credibility determinations, weigh the evidence, or decide which inferences to draw from the facts; these are jobs for a factfinder.” Johnson v. Rimmer, 936 F.3d 695, 705 (7th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation omitted). But the nonmovant must offer evidence, not mere speculation, to defeat summary judgment. See Weaver v. Champion Petfoods USA Inc., 3 F.4th 927, 934 (7th Cir. 2021).

III. Analysis

A. IDOC Defendants

1. Sovereign Immunity

All three individual IDOC Defendants, Officers Kelley, Scott and Pronger, argue they are shielded from liability under the doctrine of sovereign immunity because at all relevant times they acted as agents of the state of Illinois. The State Lawsuit Immunity Act prohibits plaintiffs from suing the state with certain exceptions. 745 ILCS 5/1; see Murphy v. Smith, 844 F.3d 653, 658 (7th Cir. 2016), aff'd, 138 S.Ct. 784 (2018). Although the claims against the IDOC Defendants are in their individual capacities, the suit may still be considered a suit against the state itself if three conditions are met: there are no allegations that a state employee acted beyond the scope of his authority through wrongful acts; if the duty alleged to have been breached was not owed to the public generally independent of the fact of state employment; and if the complained-of actions involve matters ordinarily within that employee's normal and official functions of the state. Murphy, 844 F.3d at 658 (quoting Healy v. Vaupel, 549 N.E.2d 1240, 1247 (Ill. 1990)).

Sovereign immunity does not apply, however, if a plaintiff alleges that state officials or employees violated “statutory or constitutional law” or acted in excess of their authority. Murphy, 844 F.2d at 658-59 (“If the plaintiff alleges that state officials or employees violated statutory or constitutional law, sovereign immunity affords no protection.”) (cleaned up); Richman v. Sheahan, 270 F.3d 430, 441-42 (7th Cir. 2001). Similarly, when a state law claim depends on constitutional violations, sovereign immunity does not apply. Healy, 549 N.E.2d at 1247; Wheeler v. Piazza, 364 F.Supp.3d 870, 885-86 (N.D. Ill. 2019).

Here, both of Thompson's claims against Officer Kelley arise out of the November 12 incident. Thompson alleges the fall amounted to excessive use of force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and constituted IIED. Because Thompson alleges Kelley's conduct was unconstitutional, sovereign immunity does not shield him from liability.

Thompson's claims against Officers Scott and Pronger, on the other hand are barred by sovereign immunity. The Third Amended Complaint alleges only an IIED claim against Scott and Pronger based on...