United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Charles R. Simpson III, Senior Judge
Ronnie Snow filed the instant pro se 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 action proceeding in forma pauperis.
This matter is before the Court on initial review pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915A. For the reasons stated below, the
Court will dismiss some of Plaintiff's claims and allow
others to proceed for further development.
is a convicted inmate at the Kentucky State Reformatory
(KSR). He sues the following Defendants: KSR; Warden Aaron
Smith; Correct Care Solution; RN Shannon Hardesty, whom
Plaintiff identifies as being an employee of Correct Care
Solution in the body of his complaint; and Baptist Healthcare
Systems, Inc. He sues Smith and Hardesty in both their
official and individual capacities.
states that he has an “Order for do not
Resuscitate” which was filed with Correct Care
Solution. Plaintiff asserts that on May 30, 2016, medical
personnel were requested to respond to the Pill Call area
where he had fallen out of his wheelchair. He states,
“Correct Care Solution Nurse RN Shannon Hardesty and
Lieutenant Verdi were performing CPR on inmate Snow. On the
DNR Order said that CPR will not started by emergency medical
services personnel. Above is a clear case of violation on the
DNR order.” After communications among various KSR
personnel as detailed in the complaint, an Oldham County EMS
ambulance transported Plaintiff to the emergency room of
Baptist Hospital East, where he was admitted from May 30,
2016, to June 8, 2016. With regard to his treatment at
Baptist Hospital East, Plaintiff states as follows:
Ronnie Snow presented to Baptist Health, Louisville, Ky.
Hospital after he had a cardiac arrest and had CPR done and
was admitted to Baptist East. The patient had an ST elevation
MI and he was followed by cardiology and eventually had a
heart catheter done couple of days ago that showed severe
native vessel disease but the recommendation was to go with
medical management at this point. Patient recovered from
neurologically and respiratory failure. Patient had a cardiac
arrest at the time admit to the hospital and recovered and
release on the 6-8-2016, back to KSR and Correct Care
Solution for his medical care.
further states, “Oldham County EMS or ambulance
personnels and the Baptist Healthcare or the Hospital violate
the DNR Order that Snow has in place.” Plaintiff
references a KSR Incident Report and states, “Official
in Charge Warden Aaron Smith, Medical Emergency by Correct
Care Solution, and staff member Involvement as
follows:” Thereafter, he lists the names of eleven KSR
staff members and states that “each person on this
lists above violate the Do Not Resuscitate Order on May 30,
2016. Also Inadequate Medical Record on the DNR Order.”
Plaintiff alleges violations of the Eighth and Fourteenth
Amendments. He states that Defendants showed deliberate
indifference to his medical needs in violating the Do Not
Resuscitate Order. He states, “Medical records is
inadequate and unprofessional. Correct Care Solution has no
adequately Doctor or Train Nures to meet Snow medical
relief, Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, punitive and
compensatory damages, declaratory relief, and all fees.
prisoner initiates a civil action seeking redress from a
governmental entity, officer, or employee, the trial court
must review the complaint and dismiss the complaint, or any
portion of it, if the court determines that the complaint is
frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a
defendant who is immune from such relief. See §
1915A(b)(1), (2); McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d
601, 604 (6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by
Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007).
order to survive dismissal for failure to state a claim,
“a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.'” Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl.
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A
claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads
factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable
inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct
alleged.” Id. (citing Twombly, 550
U.S. at 556). “[A] district court must (1) view the
complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and
(2) take all well-pleaded factual allegations as true.”
Tackett v. M & G Polymers, USA, LLC, 561 F.3d
478, 488 (6th Cir. 2009) (citing Gunasekera v.
Irwin, 551 F.3d 461, 466 (6th Cir. 2009) (citations
omitted)). “But the district court need not accept a
‘bare assertion of legal conclusions.'”
Tackett, 561 F.3d at 488 (quoting Columbia
Natural Res., Inc. v. Tatum, 58 F.3d 1101, 1109 (6th
Cir. 1995)). “A pleading that offers ‘labels and
conclusions' or ‘a formulaic recitation of the
elements of a cause of action will not do.' Nor does a
complaint suffice if it tenders ‘naked
assertion[s]' devoid of ‘further factual
enhancement.'” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678
(quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 557).
this Court recognizes that pro se pleadings are to
be held to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings
drafted by lawyers, Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,
520-21 (1972); Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108, 110
(6th Cir. 1991), “[o]ur duty to be ‘less
stringent' with pro se complaints does not require us to
conjure up unpled allegations.” McDonald v.
Hall, 610 F.2d 16, 19 (1st Cir. 1979) (citation
omitted). And this Court is not required to create a claim
for Plaintiff. Clark v. Nat'l Travelers Life
Ins. Co., 518 F.2d 1167, 1169 (6th Cir. 1975). To
command otherwise would require the Court “to explore
exhaustively all potential claims of a pro se
plaintiff, [and] would also transform the district court from
its legitimate advisory role to the improper role of an
advocate seeking out the strongest arguments and most
successful strategies for a party.” Beaudett v.
City of Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274, 1278 (4th Cir. 1985).