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.

Dahms v. Kentucky Department of Corrections

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky

July 6, 2018

DAVID DAHMS PLAINTIFF
v.
KENTUCKY DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS et al. DEFENDANTS

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          CHARLES R. SIMPSON III, SENIOR JUDGE

         This is a pro se civil rights action brought by a convicted prisoner pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter is before the Court for screening of Plaintiff's amended complaint (DN 7) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. For the reasons set forth below, this action will be dismissed in part and allowed to continue in part.

         I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         Plaintiff's initial complaint was not filed on a Court-supplied § 1983 form. It consisted of 17 type-written pages and named 18 Defendants but failed to describe how each Defendant had violated Plaintiff's constitutional rights. Thus, the Court entered an Order directing Plaintiff to file an amended complaint on a Court-supplied § 1983 complaint form and to follow specific instructions when completing the form (DN 6). In the Order, Plaintiff was informed that his amended complaint would supersede his original complaint.

         Plaintiff filed his amended complaint on May 16, 2018. Upon review of the amended complaint, the Court determined that certain claims and one party should be severed from the action and transferred to another district (DN 11, Memorandum and Order). Specifically, the Court determined that Plaintiff's claims based upon his back injury and the alleged failure of officials to diagnose and treat him at Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex, as well as any claims against Defendant Elam, should be severed from this action and transferred to the Eastern District of Kentucky. Id.

         II. SUMMARY OF REMAINING CLAIMS IN AMENDED COMPLAINT

         With regard to the remaining claims before the Court, Plaintiff names the following as Defendants in this action - the Kentucky Department of Corrections (KDOC); KDOC Commissioner James Erwin; Correct Care Solutions, Inc. (CCS); “Betsy Ramey (APRN)”; Dr. Elton Amos; and “any other John or Jane Does.”[1] Plaintiff sues Defendants Ramey and Amos in both their official and individual capacities, but does not state in what capacity he sues Defendant Erwin.

         Plaintiff asserts as follows:

Each Defendant was negligent. On 9-19-17 I was admitted to University of Kentucky for a transforminal lumbar interbody fusion at L-4-5. The procedure went well but upon release [Defendant KDOC] was gave a treatment plan with specific instructions for medication, acetaminophen 325 me oral 2 tab every 4 hours, drazelam 5 mg oral 1 tablet every 4 hrs., docusate sodium 100 mg oral 1 cap 2 times day, Gabapenisin 300 mg oral capsule 1 cap 3x a day, oxycodone-acetaminophin 1 tab orally every 4 hours as needed moderate to severe pain. Medical records state Do not take any other medication except that is prescribed by surgeon. I was left in extreme pain until it finally subsided. I never received any of medication prescribed.
Also each Defendant intentionally inflicted emotional distress and outrage by denying me the proper care of my surgeons.
There were multiple grievances filed . . . I have exhausted administrative remedies by filing grievances.
It appears that Plaintiff's claims concerning the denial of prescribed medication occurred at Kentucky State Reformatory, where he has seemingly been incarcerated since his back surgery.

         As relief, Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages and injunctive relief in the form of revoking the medical licenses of the Defendant nurse and doctor named in the amended complaint.

         III. LEGAL STANDARD

         When a 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 ...


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.