United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
STEVEN J. OSTERMAN, Plaintiff,
JOHN KIES, et al., Defendants.
DECISION AND ORDER
William C. Griesbach, Chief Judge United States District
Steven Osterman, who is currently representing himself, filed
this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against defendants John
Kies, Andrew Wesner, and Nathan Beier on April 10, 2017.
Osterman claims Defendants were deliberately indifferent to
his special accommodations for urinalysis testing due to his
diagnosis of paruresis, or shy bladder syndrome. Presently
before the court is Defendants' motion for summary
judgment. For the following reasons, the motion will be
granted and the case will be dismissed.
was housed at Redgranite Correctional Institution at all
times relevant to this action. Defs.' Proposed Findings
of Fact (DPFOF) ¶ 1, ECF No. 22. Osterman has suffered
from paruresis, or shy bladder syndrome, since the 1970s and
was officially diagnosed with paruresis in the early 2000s.
Paruresis is a social phobia that causes great difficulty
urinating in the presence of others. Osterman's paruresis
causes him “great anxiety” when attempting to
urinate in front of other individuals. Osterman has also been
diagnosed with chronic coronary artery disease and has had
five heart surgeries. Physicians determined the
“increased emotional stress associated with his
long-standing history of ‘bashful bladder'”
contributed to his hypertension and anginal symptoms and is
likely to contribute to his cardiac risk. ECF No. 33-1 at 5.
Osterman takes nitroglycerin to treat his heart condition.
on his paruresis diagnosis, Osterman has received special
accommodations during urinalysis testing at the various
institutions he has been housed. Once Osterman was
transferred to Redgranite in 2012, he requested that the
institution provide him with special accommodations during
urinalysis testing, which was conducted in the housing
unit's public bathroom. Deputy Warden Eckstein granted
his request on December 4, 2012 and provided the following
I have received a request for special accommodation for the
U/A collection process. I have reviewed this request with Mr.
Schueler, Security Director. You will be provided additional
time to provide a urine sample. Once you have been identified
to provide a sample you will be required to sit on the bench
near the sergeant's station after the closing of
dayrooms. You will be offered fluids consistent with present
policy. An officer will accompany you to the bathroom where
you will be strip searched. You will be permitted to use the
last bathroom stall-with the door closed-in order to produce
a urine sample. The officer will stand outside the stall
while you produce the urine sample.
24-1 at 1.
2013, Redgranite began conducting urinalysis testing in the
intake area. DPFOF ¶ 14. The intake bathroom is small
and private. It is surrounded on all sides by solid, opaque
walls and contains a metal door with only a small, narrow
window. Id. ¶ 19. When Osterman learned that
the testing location had changed, he submitted a
psychological service request (PSR) on July 14, 2013,
requesting that his special accommodations “be changed
in order to alleviate any problems regarding [his]
paruresis.” ECF No. 24-1 at 2. Osterman sent a second
request on August 5, 2013 because he had “not received
any word or paperwork regarding ‘special
accommodations' for the paruresis dealing with
UAs.” Id. at 3. On August 6, 2013, Dr. Fleck
sent Osterman a memo which stated,
I spoke to Lt. Wesner regarding your concerns about providing
UA samples. Lt. Wesner confirmed that you will continue to
receive accommodations, which will involve you being granted
privacy when providing UA samples.
When you are called to provide UA samples, please bring the
relevant paperwork that indicates you have been granted
Id. at 4. This memo did not define
“privacy” or note any accommodations specific to
the new urinalysis testing location.
was first selected for testing at Redgranite on June 29,
2016. He reported to the testing site with an envelope
containing the December 4, 2012 memo from Warden Eckstein;
his July 14, 2013 PSR; his August 5, 2013 PSR; and the August
6, 2013 memo from Dr. Fleck. DPFOF ¶ 24. Officer Kies
reviewed the accommodation paperwork and observed that the
December 2012 accommodations were inapplicable to the testing
conditions in intake. Without conferring with Officer Kies,
Officer Benbo escorted Osterman to the intake bathroom and
closed the door. After Osterman provided a sample, Kies asked
for Osterman's accommodation paperwork so he could review
it with his supervisor and told Osterman he would be
contacted if there was a problem with the accommodations.
Kies claims that a supervisor advised him that it was no
longer necessary to follow the accommodation paperwork
because the testing location had changed and the
accommodations paperwork appeared to be outdated. After
meeting with this supervisor, Kies returned the paperwork to
Osterman. Id. ¶¶ 33-34.
was again selected for testing with Officer Kies on August
17, 2016. Osterman arrived at intake with the envelope that
contained his accommodation paperwork and said,
“I'm Osterman, the one with special accommodations
for privacy for urine samples.” Id. ¶ 37.
Kies did not take the documents out of the envelope or review
them because he believed the envelope contained the same
accommodation paperwork he read on June 29, 2016. Osterman
does not dispute that the information in the envelope had not
setting the envelope on a chair, Kies placed Osterman in the
intake area's holding cell and asked if he was ready to
provide a sample. Osterman responded that he would try.
Id. ¶ 43. Kies escorted Osterman to the
bathroom and partially closed the door, leaving the door
cracked two to three inches. Osterman was unable to provide a
sample because he could see Kies watching him through the
crack in the door. Kies then placed Osterman back in the
holding cell. Approximately ten minutes later, Kies asked if
Osterman would like to try again. Osterman told him that he
would try to provide a sample but needed privacy. Kies