Wicker v. Lawless

278 F.Supp.3d 989

Donna WICKER, Plaintiff,

v.Jeffery S. LAWLESS, et al., Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:15–cv–00237

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division.

Signed September 30, 2017

C. Raphael Davis–Williams, The Law Office of Spater & Davis–Williams, LLC, Columbus, OH, for Plaintiff.

Randall Lee Lambert, Ironton, OH, for Defendants.

OPINION & ORDER

Hon. Michael R. Barrett, United States District Judge

Plaintiff Donna Wicker asserts claims arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Jeffery S. Lawless (Lawrence County Sheriff), Defendant Michael Mosley, Defendant Courtney James, and Defendant John Doe. Plaintiff alleges that, during her confinement at the Lawrence County Jail, Defendants Mosley, James, and Doe violated her Constitutional right to be free from excessive force. (Doc. 4, PAGEID# 30, ¶ 74). She further claims that all Defendants are liable for their alleged failure to provide adequate medical care (id. at 30, ¶ 77), and that Sheriff Lawless is liable for his purported failure to "adequately train and/or supervise Defendants Mosley and James with regard to timely providing and administering medications to inmates with known serious medical conditions." (Id. at 31, ¶ 80). Plaintiff is suing all Defendants in their respective individual and official capacities. (Id. at 21–22, ¶¶ 4–7).

This matter is before the Court on: (1) Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions against Defendants and Defendants' Counsel for Discovery Misconduct under Rule 37 ("Motion for Sanctions") (Doc. 27); (2) Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 29); and (3) Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Exhibit A to Defendants' Reply Memorandum to Plaintiff's Memorandum Contra Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment ("Motion to Strike") (Doc. 42). Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions have been fully briefed. Despite an opportunity to do so, Defendants never filed an opposition to the Motion to Strike. Accordingly, the foregoing Motions are ripe for disposition.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Parties do not dispute that, on April 10, 2013, Plaintiff pleaded guilty to a criminal charge of theft and was sentenced to serve four years in prison, with release in six (6) months with good behavior, by the Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas.

The Parties also appear to agree that Plaintiff is a 55–year old, Type 2 Diabetic who, at all relevant times, required a daily regimen of medications. Plaintiff also suffers from hypertension and must take the medication Cozor on a daily basis to control and manage her blood pressure; Zorcor to manage and control her cholesterol; and Hydrocotorthoricide, a water pill. (Doc. 29; PAGEID# 273). Defendants do not appear to dispute that Plaintiff was required to take her medication each day before breakfast and after dinner. (Id. ).

On April 10, 2013, Plaintiff anticipated receiving a prison sentence, and as a result, packaged and prepared her medications prior to her incarceration so that she would have them in jail; however, Defendants dispute whether the jail ever received her medications. (Id. at 281).

A. Plaintiff's Version

During Plaintiff's booking process, she allegedly told an LCSO booking officer of her medical conditions, indicating that she needed to take her medications that night. (Doc. 37–1; PAGEID# 703, 704). Plaintiff claims that, on April 10, 2013, her daughter had provided jail administrators with Plaintiff's current medications, in their original bottles, with the bottles in clear plastic bags. (Id. at 711). On the evening of April 10, 2013, the Plaintiff requested her medication. (Id. at 704). According to Plaintiff, a Lawrence County Correctional Officer stated to Plaintiff that her medications were not at the jail. (Id. ).

On the morning of April 11, 2013, prior to eating breakfast, Plaintiff again requested her medications that her daughter provided to jail administrators on the previous day. (Id. at 705). Plaintiff also allegedly requested her medication on the evening of April 11, 2013, prior to eating dinner. (Id. ). Plaintiff contends that she also requested her medication on the morning of April 12, 2013, prior to eating breakfast. (Id. ). However, every time the Plaintiff requested her medications, she was told by Corrections Officers that they had no medications to dispense to her. (Id. ). Plaintiff claims she made calls home to members of her family, who became upset about the situation regarding her medication, and in turn made calls to the Lawrence County Jail. (Id. ). However, Plaintiff never identifies any specific named Defendant with whom she discussed her medical condition or to whom her family members conversed. (Doc. 37–1; PAGEID# 703–705) (see, e.g. , ¶ 22, "the male correction's officer was the first Lawrence County Jail employee I spoke with"; ¶ 24, "I told this officer I had to check my blood glucose at least four times each day"; ¶ 37 "the jailer said he would check" on her medications, etc.).

On the evening of April 12, 2013, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Mosley presented her with a small paper cup with pills in it. (Id. at 706). Plaintiff claims that she did recognize the size, shape, and color of the pills. (Id. ). Plaintiff claims that, when she told Defendant Mosley of the error, he intimidated her into taking the medication by yelling "take those fucking meds!" and "take those fucking meds now!" (Id. ) Plaintiff claims that, within two hours of ingesting the medication, Plaintiff became nauseous, dizzy, and lightheaded. (Id. at 707). The Parties dispute the severity of her injuries, including her post-ingestion glucose and blood pressure levels.

After Plaintiff alerted Defendant James that she was feeling ill, Defendant James brought Plaintiff to sit on a bench in the booking room. (Id. ). Plaintiff claims that Defendant James shoved her at times while walking down the hall, and because she was ill she would lose her balance and "bump" her head "between the wall and the bars." (Id. ). At that time, Defendant James told Plaintiff to test her sugar. (Id. ). Plaintiff claims that before she could test her sugar, she lost consciousness and fell from the bench to the floor. (Id. ). Plaintiff allegedly awoke to Defendant James kneading her chest with her knuckles, in an attempt to awaken Plaintiff. (Id. ). Plaintiff, after awaking, self-administered a glucose test and claims that she lost consciousness again, but before she lost consciousness, she heard Defendant James' voice saying "it's near 400," referring to the Plaintiff's glucose level. (Id. ). What happened next is unclear, because Plaintiff herself provides three different accounts. First, the First Amended Complaint alleges that the Plaintiff regained consciousness for the second time, awaking on a mat on the floor, and Defendant Mosley, Defendant James, and Defendant John Doe were all kicking her in her left ribs, left thigh, and left shoulder. (First Amended Complaint, ¶ 50). Second, Plaintiff's deposition testimony states that Defendant Mosley was not involved in the kicking. (Doc. 30–3; PAGEID# 449). Third, her later declaration alleges no kicking on the part of Defendant James. (Doc. 37–1; PAGEID# 707) ("I passed out for a second time. I awoke this time to Defendant James kneading my chest and two other jail employees kicking me in the upper left shoulder and side.").

Plaintiff recalls EMTs arriving, and EMTs kicking her as well. (Id. at 707). Plaintiff was taken to St. Mary's Hospital in Ironton, Ohio. (Id. at 708).

B. Defendants' Version

Defendants' claim that there is no evidence, beyond the "self-serving" declaration of Plaintiff's daughter, that Plaintiff's medications ever arrived at the jail. (Doc. 29; PAGEID# 281). Defendant Mosley denies dispensing any medication to Plaintiff, let alone forcing her to take pills. (Doc. 30–2; PAGEID# 410, 417). He suggests that he could not have been the one to dispense the medication, because Plaintiff recalls taking the pills at 5 p.m., jail records reflect that medicine was passed at 7:40 p.m., and he worked the midnight shift from 8:00 pm. to 6:00 a.m. (Id. ). He thus claims he was not even on duty when medicine was passed; however, Plaintiff argues that Defendant Mosley did not log his own time, asking others to record log entries on his behalf due to his poor handwriting, which creates a genuine dispute of material fact regarding his presence at the jail. (Id. at 382).

Both Defendants Mosley and James deny kicking or shoving Plaintiff. They further argue that none of the medical records suggest that Plaintiff was kicked. (Doc. 29; PAGEID# 287). Furthermore, Defendants deny that Plaintiff suffered any "sufficiently serious" injury due to being allegedly deprived of her medication, or dispensed the wrong medication. (Doc. 40). For example, according to the jail's records, Plaintiff's blood sugar level when the EMS arrived at the jail was 190—not the 400 Plaintiff claims. (Id. at 740).

II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A succinct recitation of the procedural background of this case has been complicated by the resurrection of various discovery-related issues. Although the Court extended the discovery deadline multiple times, and was advised on September 1, 2016 that the Parties had resolved outstanding disputes regarding the scope of discovery, Plaintiff argues that the discovery process has caused her prejudice. She asserts that this Court should thus disregard certain evidence offered by Defendants, entangling her discovery-related arguments with dispositive motion briefing.

A. Posture of Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions

For months, discovery progressed in this case without the need for Court intervention. See, e.g. , September 23, 2015 Minute Entry for Proceedings ("parties report discovery is progressing"); October 28, 2015 Minute Entry for Proceedings (same). However, the Court became involved in Spring 2016 as the March 31, 2016 discovery deadline approached. Defendants—without objection from Plaintiff—requested an extension on...