Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Archy v. Connections CSP, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Delaware

January 9, 2018

AARON ARCHY, Plaintiff,
v.
CONNECTIONS CSP, INC. and DR. DEROSIERS, [1]Defendants.

          Aaron Archy, James T. Vaughn Correctional Center, Smyrna, Delaware; Pro Se Plaintiff.

          Roopa Sabesan, Esquire, White & Williams, Wilmington, Delaware, Counsel for Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          ANDREWS, U.S. District Judge

         Plaintiff Aaron Archy, an inmate at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He proceeds pro se and has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court screened the complaint and amended complaint on November 4, 2016, and identified cognizable and non-frivolous clams. (See D.I. 9). Defendants move for dismissal. (D.I. 17). Plaintiff opposes. (D.I. 18). Briefing on the matter is complete

         BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff was injured on June 11, 2014, during a fight with another inmate. (D.I. 4 at ¶ 9). His right hand was swollen, he had excruciating pain, and one of his knuckles was not visible. (Id. at ¶¶ 12, 13). After he used his left hand to feel his knuckle, he concluded his knuckle was fractured. (Id. at ¶ 13). That day he was examined by a nurse who told him there was no fracture and then he was escorted to "the hole." (Id. at ¶¶ 15-23).

         The next morning, the pain had worsened and the hand was badly swollen. (Id. at ¶ 2). Plaintiff submitted a sick call slip on June 13, 2014 and, on June 14, 2014, was seen by the same nurse who had examined him on the day he was injured. (Id. at ¶¶ 25-26). Again, she told Plaintiff there was no fracture, but prescribed pain medication for seven days. (Id. at ¶¶ 27-28).

         Plaintiff submitted another sick call slip on July 4, 2014 and, the next day, saw the same nurse who granted Plaintiff's request for an x-ray. (Id. at ¶¶ 30-32). Plaintiff's hand was x-rayed one month after he was injured. (Id. at ¶ 33). When Plaintiff had not been told the x-ray results by August 27, 2014, he submitted a sick call slip. (Id. at ¶¶ 34-35). The next day, the same nurse told Plaintiff he would be seen by a physician the next week to discuss the x-ray results. (Id.). He was not.

         On September 6, 2014, Plaintiff submitted a medical grievance for proper medical attention, and a hearing was held on September 25, 2014. (Id. at ¶¶ 38-39). The grievance investigation found that Dr. DesRosiers had reviewed the x-ray results on August 21, 2014 and ordered that Plaintiff be seen by an outside medical provider.[2] (Id. at ¶ 42; Ex. C). Plaintiff was not seen by an outside medical provider. (Id.).

         On September 26, 2014, a repeat x-ray was ordered (apparently as result of the investigation) and Plaintiff was scheduled to see an outside medical provider. (Id.) The repeat x-ray was taken on September 29, 2014, and at that time Plaintiff was told that the first x-ray had been misplaced, but found, and the two x-rays would be compared. (Id. at ¶¶ 44, 45).

         On October 9, 2014, Plaintiff was seen by Dr. DesRosiers who told him that, based upon the x-rays, the knuckle was fractured and had healed wrong and out of place, it would remain that way, and there was nothing she could do to fix the deformed knuckle. (Id. at ¶¶ 46-50). Dr. DesRosiers referred Plaintiff to an outside medical specialist. Plaintiff saw the specialist on October 16, 2014, and was told that the fracture had not healed properly, and the deformity and disfigurement would not have resulted had Plaintiff been treated in a timely manner. (Id. at ¶¶ 51-54).

         Defendants moves for dismissal (D.I. 9) pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(5) and (6) on the grounds that: (1) Dr. DesRosiers was not timely and properly served; and (2) Plaintiff fails to state claims upon which relief may be granted. (D.I. 17).

         DISCUSSION

         Service on ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.