United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
ADELMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Justin Lee Douglas, a Wisconsin state prisoner who is
representing himself, filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. I allowed the plaintiff to proceed on claims
under the Eighth Amendment based on his allegations that the
defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious
medical needs while he was incarcerated at the Outagamie
County Jail. On August 30, 2019, defendants Beth Broyld, Gail
Craft, and Beverly Weber (the “Medical
Defendants”) filed a motion for summary
judgment. Docket No. 118. That same day, defendants
Sergeant Lance Willson, Sergeant Paul Rosenthal, Sergeant
Bruce Hintze, and Sergeant Tracy Edwards (the “Jail
Defendants”) filed their motion for summary
judgment. Docket No. 125. I will grant the
plaintiff filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on
June 4, 2018, naming several John and Jane Doe defendants.
Docket No. 1. On March 4 and April 5, 2019, the plaintiff
moved to amend his complaint to identify the Doe defendants
as Nurse Tyler Rich, Nurse Mary Benotsch, Nurse Lisa
Kowalski, Nurse Practitioner Shelby DePas, Dr. Thomas
Finnegan, and Officer Deverase. Docket Nos. 86, 93. I granted
the plaintiff's motions; however, on June 25, 2019, I
dismissed those six defendants because the plaintiff's
claims against them were barred by the statute of
limitations. Docket No. 117. These individuals were involved
the events I will describe below, but they are no longer
defendants in this case.
plaintiff was booked into the Outagamie County Jail on June
12, 2012. Docket No. 140 at ¶ 18. According to the
plaintiff, when he entered his cell, he noticed that his
mattress had a green-like fungus growing on it. Docket No.
147 at ¶ 4. The plaintiff asserts that he stopped an
officer to tell him about the mattress; the officer told him
he could get cleaning supplies in the morning to clean it.
Id. The Jail Defendants explain that, at that time,
when an inmate was placed in his cell, he was given, among
other things, sheets for the mattress and cleaning wipes.
Id. The plaintiff does not clarify whether he used
the wipes to clean his mattress, whether he used the sheets
to cover his mattress, or whether he obtained additional
cleaning supplies the next morning as the officer instructed.
Medical Defendants assert that health services staff
completed an initial “Inmate Screening Report” on
June 13, 2012. Docket No. 151 at ¶ 21. The plaintiff did
not disclose any groin or testicle issue, and the plaintiff
agrees that he was not suffering from any issues with his
groin or testicles when he completed the form. Id.
at ¶¶ 22-23.
plaintiff asserts that, on his first morning in the Jail, he
told the nurse on medication pass that his mattress had a
green fungus, which was now growing on his testicles. Docket
No. 147 at ¶ 5. The plaintiff, who presumably was
wearing at least underwear and who had been given sheets to
sleep on, does not explain how the fungus came into contact
with his testicles. The plaintiff asserts that, for the next
three days (June 14-16), he told the nurses on morning
medication pass that he had a medical emergency in that his
testicles were very swollen and painful. Id. at
¶¶ 6-8. The Jail Defendants explain that inmates
are not permitted to make oral requests for non-emergency
care; instead, they must submit a formal sick call request on
the form provided by the Jail. Docket No. 151 at ¶ 12.
to the plaintiff, on the morning of June 17, 2012, he told
Nurse Broyld that he was having a medical emergency and that
he needed to be seen right away because his testicles and the
area between his anus were very swollen and painful and he
could barely walk. Docket. No. 150 at ¶ 9. The plaintiff
states that Nurse Broyld told him that he should submit a
health services slip because she did not think his condition
was an emergency. Id. The plaintiff submitted his
first written sick call request that day, five days after he
entered the Jail. Docket No. 140 at ¶ 25. In his
request, the plaintiff stated that something was “wrong
with the muscle/bone between [his] leg” and that he
could not walk and was in pain. Id. at ¶ 26.
services staff responded to the plaintiff and told him that
they had scheduled him to be seen by health services staff
and a physician. Docket No. 140 at ¶ 26. Nurse Broyld
met with the plaintiff about six hours after health services
received his slip. Id. at ¶ 28; Docket No. 150
at ¶ 10. According to Nurse Broyld's notes, the
plaintiff complained of an “injury to his coccyx”
and a “hand injury” after being hit by a squad
car. Docket No. 140 at ¶ 29. The plaintiff denies he
told Nurse Broyld that he had been hit by a squad car; he
asserts that he told her he had severe pain and swelling in
his groin area after sleeping on a filthy mattress.
Broyld performed a physical exam, which confirmed that the
plaintiff's blood pressure, temperature, pulse, and
oxygen levels were all within the normal range. Id.
at ¶ 31. Nurse Broyld also examined the plaintiff's
hip, coccyx, and buttocks region and concluded that, while
the area was tender, the plaintiff could still ambulate
without difficulty during the exam. Id. at ¶
32. Nurse Broyld asserts that she consulted with an advanced
practice nurse prescriber (who is not a defendant), who
prescribed a 14-day regimen of Ibuprofen for his pain and
ordered a follow up with a nurse practitioner or doctor.
Id. at ¶ 33. The plaintiff received Ibuprofen
that day, but he states that, because he was in so much pain,
he was unable to walk to the medication window the following
day to receive it. Id. at ¶ 35.
plaintiff asserts that the next morning he stopped the nurse
during medication pass and told her he was in severe pain
because of the swelling in his testicles. Docket No. 150 at
¶ 11. The Medical Defendants explain that Nurse Weber
participated in medication pass that day and that, prior to
June 22, the plaintiff never appeared to be suffering from a
medical emergency. Id. Further, the Medical
Defendants state that health services was aware of the
plaintiff's complaints and knew he was being observed and
19, 2012, two days after Nurse Broyld's examination, Dr.
Finnegan (who is no longer a defendant) examined the
plaintiff. Docket No. 140 at ¶ 36. His examination note
reflects that the plaintiff's vitals were still within
normal ranges. Docket No. 151 at ¶ 34. The note also
reflects Dr. Finnegan's inquiries about the
plaintiff's injury, allegedly caused by being hit by a
squad car. Docket No. 140 at ¶ 37. Dr. Finnegan's
examination note questions why there is no bruising
consistent with a traumatic injury, notes that there was
slight swelling to the plaintiff's testicle, and states
that the plaintiff expressed that he did not want anything
done for his injury. Id. at ¶¶ 38-39.
plaintiff disputes the accuracy of Dr. Finnegan's note.
The plaintiff asserts that he told Dr. Finnegan that he was
not hit by a squad car; he told him he had slept on
a filthy mattress and now he had an infection. Id.
at ¶ 37. He asserts that he never would have refused
treatment because he was in serious pain, could barely walk,
and was sweating profusely. Id. at ¶ 39.
According to the plaintiff, Dr. Finnegan said he had never
seen anything like the plaintiff's condition before, and
then he asked Nurse Craft to take a look. Id. The
plaintiff states that she, too, said that the plaintiff's
condition was unfamiliar to her. Id. The plaintiff
states that they sent him back to his cell. Id.
following day, on June 20, 2012, Nurse Benotsch (who is no
longer a defendant) followed up with the plaintiff.
Id. at ¶ 41. The plaintiff complained of
chills, nausea, vomiting, and sweating. Id. Nurse
Benotsch noted that the plaintiff appeared flush and that she
believed he may be suffering from a viral infection.
Id. She told the plaintiff to increase his fluids
and rest, and she gave him Tylenol to help alleviate his
symptoms. Id. at ¶ 43. Based on her suspicions
of a viral infection, health services staff collected a urine
sample. Id. at ¶ 44.
services received the lab results the next day and noted the
presence of Ketones and blood in the plaintiff's urine.
Id. Health services sent the plaintiff a note
explaining that the jail physician believed he was suffering
from a urinary tract infection, which would be treated with
an antibiotic. Id. at ¶ 45. That same day, an
order was entered for the plaintiff to receive the antibiotic
Bactrim DS for seven days. Id. at ¶ 46. He
received his first dose that night, at about 8 p.m.
Id. at ¶ 47.
plaintiff asserts that, at about 4 a.m. on June 22, he fell
in his cell. Docket No. 147 at ¶ 17. Sergeant McVay (who
is not a defendant) decided to move the plaintiff to a
holding cell via wheelchair for further observation.
Id.; Docket No. 141 at ¶ 24. Sgt. McVay also
contacted Nurse Sandy Geisler (who is not a defendant); she
told Sgt. McVay to let the plaintiff stay in the holding cell
until the on-duty medical staff arrived to assess his
condition. Id. at ¶ 25. She also told Sgt.
McVay to give the plaintiff two Tylenol, which he did.
Id. at ¶ 26. The plaintiff received his second
dose of the antibiotic at 6:41 a.m. Docket No. 140 at ¶
Rich (who is no longer a defendant) met with the plaintiff at
9:27 a.m. Id. at ¶ 52. Health services had
obtained a stool sample from the plaintiff and a second urine
sample. Id. at ¶ 50. Nurse Rich did a physical
exam of the plaintiff and noted that his scrotum was red and
swollen. Id. at ¶ 53. He also confirmed that
the plaintiff's vitals were within the normal range.
Id. Nurse Rich told the plaintiff to increase his
fluids and that Nurse Practitioner DePas (who is no longer a
defendant) was working on a plan of care. Id. at
services received the test results that same day, at about 10
a.m. Id. at ¶¶ 54, 56. The urinalysis
showed that the plaintiff no longer had evidence of Ketones
in his urine and had only trace amounts of blood; there was
no blood in the plaintiff's stool. Id. The
plaintiff states that, regardless, he told Nurse Practitioner
DePas that the swelling and pain were worse. Docket No. 150
at ¶ 19.
reviewing the lab results, Nurse Practitioner DePas expanded
the differential diagnosis from just an infection to also
include possible kidney stones. Docket No. 140 at ¶ 57.
She indicated that the plaintiff should be seen daily for
follow-up assessments. Id. She also indicated that
the plaintiff had been told to rest and to give the
antibiotics time to work. Id. at ¶ 59. Nurse
Practitioner DePas followed up with the plaintiff later that
day to assess his condition. Id. at ¶ 60.
According to her notes, the plaintiff told her that the
swelling was actually getting a little better, but he was
having trouble eating and wanted to be moved back to his
regular cell. Id. at ¶ 61. The plaintiff
disputes that he told her his swelling was better or that he
wanted to be moved to a non-observation cell. Id.
to Nurse Practitioner DePas, based on the test results and
physical examinations, she believed that the plaintiff could
be suffering from a skin infection, including MRSA, or that
he could be passing kidney stones. Id. at ¶ 62.
She explains that Bactrim, which the plaintiff was already
receiving for a possible urinary tract infection, was the
proper treatment for a skin infection. Id. at ¶
63. She also explains that it can take up to 48 hours for an
antibiotic to start to work. Id. The plaintiff
asserts that, in addition to the skin irritation, his
testicles were then the size of ...