Case: Stanard v. Dy

2:19-cv-01400 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington

Filed Date: Aug. 30, 2019

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case arose out of a federal prison's response to a pretrial inmate's request for Hepatitis C treatment. On October 17, 2019, the inmate filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The plaintiff brought a Bivens claim against multiple doctors and administrators for the Federal Detention Center in SeaTac, Washington (FDC SeaTac). The plaintiff alleged that the defendants (1) violated the Eighth Amendment by denying him medical treatment, and (2) violated the…

This case arose out of a federal prison's response to a pretrial inmate's request for Hepatitis C treatment. On October 17, 2019, the inmate filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The plaintiff brought a Bivens claim against multiple doctors and administrators for the Federal Detention Center in SeaTac, Washington (FDC SeaTac). The plaintiff alleged that the defendants (1) violated the Eighth Amendment by denying him medical treatment, and (2) violated the Fifth Amendment by discriminating against him because of his status as a pre-trial detainee. The plaintiff sought compensatory and punitive damages. The plaintiff appeared pro se in the trial court, and he was represented on appeal by the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law Bluhm Legal Clinic and Rights Behind Bars. The case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Michelle L. Peterson and Chief Judge Ricardo Martinez.

The plaintiff filed an amended complaint on February 17, 2020. In his amended complaint, the plaintiff alleged that he first sought treatment for his pre-existing Hepatitis C diagnosis at FDC SeaTac in early 2018. The plaintiff's request was purportedly denied because (1) he was a pre-trial detainee, and (2) the test used to assess liver fibrosis and cirrhosis was not within the range required for him to receive priority treatment. The plaintiff then pursued his requests through the Bureau of Prisons administrative remedy process. In response to an informal resolution form, the plaintiff was informed that he was "a treatment Priority Level 3 and a pre-trial inmate, [and] the Bureau of Prisons... is currently focusing on treating designated Priority 1 & 2 Level inmates."

In May 2018, the plaintiff filed a formal request for an administrative remedy. He was advised that the BOP was focusing on treating priority level one and two inmates, and they would continue to monitor the plaintiff's health. The plaintiff subsequently filed two additional appeals. While those appeals were pending, the plaintiff was transferred to a different facility, and he began to receive Hepatitis C treatment in late 2018. Ultimately, the BOP concluded that the plaintiff received adequate care despite the delay in treatment.

In his amended complaint, the plaintiff brought three claims. First, he alleged that the denial of Hepatitis C treatment based on his status as a pre-trial inmate violated his Fifth Amendment equal protection rights. Second, he alleged that the defendants' failure to address his medical needs as a pre-trial inmate violated the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Third, he alleged that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The plaintiff sought $30 million in damages from five federal officials. 

On March 10, 2021, Judge Peterson recommended that the court grant the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. See 2021 WL 1341082. The report and recommendation noted that Ziglar v. Abbasi established a two-step inquiry for determining whether a Bivens claim can proceed. See 582 U.S. 120 (2017). First, a court must determine whether the claim arises in a "new Bivens context." If it does, then the court should not extend Bivens to the new context unless (1) the plaintiff does not have any other adequate alternative remedy, and (2) there are no "special factors" suggesting that Congress is better suited to authorize money damages.

Judge Peterson first acknowledged that the plaintiff had been convicted by the time the claims arose in this case. Thus, the Eighth Amendment was implicated, and the Fifth Amendment due process right was not. Second, the report determined that the Eighth Amendment claim and the Fifth Amendment equal protection claim arose in a "new Bivens context." Third, the court found that the plaintiff had alternate remedies available to him (i.e., BOP administrative remedies), thus precluding relief under Bivens. The court went on to note that even if relief were available under Bivens, the plaintiff failed to allege facts demonstrating that the defendants were "deliberately indifferent" to his medical needs.

On July 1, 2021, Chief Judge Martinez adopted Judge Peterson's recommendation and dismissed the case with prejudice. See 2021 WL 2709236. The plaintiff filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The appeal was heard by Circuit Judge Jacqueline Nguyen, Circuit Judge Andrew Hurwitz, and District Judge Dean Pregerson.

The Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court's order dismissing the case on December 11, 2023. See 88 F.4th 811. As to the plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim, the court found that the claim did not arise in a "new Bivens context." Specifically, the plaintiff's claims were sufficiently comparable to the Eighth Amendment claims that the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in Carlson v. Green, 446 U.S. 14 (1980). As to the plaintiff's Fifth Amendment equal protection claim, the court affirmed the District Court's dismissal. That claim arose in a new context, and the existence of alternative remedial structures precluded relief under Bivens. The case was remanded to the District Court for further proceedings.

The case is ongoing.

Summary Authors

Andrew Del Vecchio (3/17/2024)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
6

2:19-cv-01400

Civil Rights Complaint Pursuant to

Oct. 17, 2019

Oct. 17, 2019

Complaint
14

2:19-cv-01400

Amended Civil Rights Complaint

Feb. 18, 2020

Feb. 18, 2020

Complaint
35

2:19-cv-01400

Order Denying Plaintiffs' Second Motion for Appointment Counsel

Jan. 28, 2021

Jan. 28, 2021

Order/Opinion
36

2:19-cv-01400

Report and Recommendation

March 10, 2021

March 10, 2021

Magistrate Report/Recommendation

2021 WL 2021

39

2:19-cv-01400

Order Granting in Part Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time and Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Clarification and Leave to Amend

April 9, 2021

April 9, 2021

Order/Opinion

2021 WL 2021

44

2:19-cv-01400

Order Adopting Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Action

July 1, 2021

July 1, 2021

Order/Opinion

2021 WL 2021

21-35582

Opinion

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Dec. 11, 2023

Dec. 11, 2023

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16151402/stanard-v-dy/

Last updated March 18, 2024, 12:47 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Plaintiff Robert A Stanard. (Attachments: # 1 PROPOSED 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Prison Trust Account)(ST) (Entered: 09/04/2019)

Aug. 30, 2019

Aug. 30, 2019

PACER
3

LETTER sent re IFP deficiency; - The "Acknowledgment and Authorization" section of the IFP (3rd page) needs to completed and returned to the court. A copy of the IFP is enclosed for your convenience. Filer has until 10/4/2019 to correct. (cc: plaintiff via USPS w/original IFP form submitted) (ST) (Entered: 09/04/2019)

Sept. 4, 2019

Sept. 4, 2019

PACER

IFP deficiency corrected (ST)

Sept. 13, 2019

Sept. 13, 2019

PACER
4

MOTION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis before Judge Peterson, filed by Robert Allen Stanard. (Attachments: # 1 PROPOSED 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Declaration of Lonnie Lillard in Support of Complaint, # 4 Request to Attach Lonnie Lillard Declaration to Complaint, # 5 Prison Trust Account)(ST) (Entered: 09/16/2019)

Sept. 13, 2019

Sept. 13, 2019

PACER

IFP Deficiency Corrected

Sept. 16, 2019

Sept. 16, 2019

PACER
5

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND DIRECTING INSTITUTION TO CALCULATE, COLLECT, AND FORWARD PAYMENTS (cc: Plaintiff, WAWD Finance, Sheridan Finance Dept) by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. (SG) (Entered: 10/17/2019)

Oct. 17, 2019

Oct. 17, 2019

PACER

Set/Reset Deadlines

Oct. 17, 2019

Oct. 17, 2019

PACER
6

1983 PRISONER CIVIL COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Robert Allen Stanard. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Declaration, # 3 Declaration)(SG) (Entered: 10/17/2019)

Oct. 17, 2019

Oct. 17, 2019

Clearinghouse
7

ORDER DECLINING TO SERVE COMPLAINT AND GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND re 6 Complaint filed by Robert Allen Stanard, by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint curing the noted deficiencies within thirty (30) days of the date on which this Order is signed. (cc: Order and Complaint form to Plaintiff via USPS)(SG) Modified on 10/18/2019 to correct typos(MET). (Entered: 10/17/2019)

Oct. 17, 2019

Oct. 17, 2019

PACER

Set/Reset Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 11/18/2019, (SG)

Oct. 17, 2019

Oct. 17, 2019

PACER
8

MOTION for Extension of Time re 7 Order, filed by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard. (ST) (Entered: 11/05/2019)

Nov. 4, 2019

Nov. 4, 2019

PACER
9

ORDER granting 8 Motion for Extension of Time signed by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. (cc: plaintiff via USPS)(ST) (Entered: 11/14/2019)

Nov. 14, 2019

Nov. 14, 2019

PACER

Set/Reset Deadlines

Nov. 14, 2019

Nov. 14, 2019

PACER

Set/Reset Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 12/18/2019. (ST)

Nov. 14, 2019

Nov. 14, 2019

PACER

Motion Calendar

Nov. 27, 2019

Nov. 27, 2019

PACER

Amended Complaint due by 12/18/19 re 9 Order on Motion for Extension of Time, 7 Order Declining to Serve Complaint and Granting Leave to Amend.(ELS)

Nov. 27, 2019

Nov. 27, 2019

PACER
10

MOTION for Second Extension of Time to File Amended Complaint, filed by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard. (ST) (Entered: 12/17/2019)

Dec. 16, 2019

Dec. 16, 2019

PACER
11

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT signed by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson 10 Motion for Extension of Time Amended Pleadings due by 1/24/2020, (SG) (Entered: 12/23/2019)

Dec. 23, 2019

Dec. 23, 2019

PACER
12

MOTION for Extension of Time re 11 Order, filed by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard. (ST) (Entered: 01/28/2020)

Jan. 27, 2020

Jan. 27, 2020

PACER
13

ORDER GRANTING 12 PLAINTIFF'S THIRD MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT signed by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. (cc: plaintiff w/amended complaint form sent via USPS)(ST) (Entered: 01/29/2020)

Jan. 29, 2020

Jan. 29, 2020

PACER

Set/Reset Deadlines

Jan. 29, 2020

Jan. 29, 2020

PACER

Set/Reset Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 2/12/2020, (ST)

Jan. 29, 2020

Jan. 29, 2020

PACER
14

AMENDED 1983 CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Robert Allen Stanard.(defendants terminated: K Martinez, Mary Mitchell, and Leen. Defendants added: 2 unknown defendants) (SG) (Entered: 02/19/2020)

Feb. 18, 2020

Feb. 18, 2020

Clearinghouse
15

ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. Served by First-Class Mail on 5/20/2020 to: Maria Dy, M.D., Mrs. McDermott, Dan Sproul, J. Baltazar, and Ian Conners. (cc: Plaintiff order and pro se instruction sheet)(SG) (Entered: 05/14/2020)

May 13, 2020

May 13, 2020

PACER
16

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO EXECUTE 15 SERVICE ORDER by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. Served by First-Class Mail on 8/19/2020 to Maria Dy; McDermott; Dan Sproul; J Baltazar; Ian Conners. (cc: plaintiff w/pro se instruction sheet and 15 Order via USPS; Attorney General of the United States and Office of the United States Attorney, Western District of Washington via certified mail) (ST) (Entered: 08/19/2020)

Aug. 19, 2020

Aug. 19, 2020

PACER
17

RETURN RECEIPT (Green Card) re service by certified mail executed upon US Attorney's Office. (LH) (Entered: 08/26/2020)

Aug. 24, 2020

Aug. 24, 2020

PACER
18

RETURN RECEIPT (Green Card) re service by certified mail executed upon United States Attorney General. (PM) (Entered: 09/02/2020)

Aug. 31, 2020

Aug. 31, 2020

PACER
19

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 14 Amended Complaint, filed by Defendants J Baltazar, Ian Conners, Maria Dy, McDermont, Dan Sproul. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 10/30/2020, (Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 10/20/2020)

Oct. 20, 2020

Oct. 20, 2020

PACER
20

WAIVER OF SERVICE of Summons (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 10/20/2020)

Oct. 20, 2020

Oct. 20, 2020

PACER
21

WAIVER OF SERVICE of Summons (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 10/20/2020)

Oct. 20, 2020

Oct. 20, 2020

PACER
22

WAIVER OF SERVICE of Summons (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 10/20/2020)

Oct. 20, 2020

Oct. 20, 2020

PACER
23

WAIVER OF SERVICE of Summons (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 10/20/2020)

Oct. 20, 2020

Oct. 20, 2020

PACER
25

MOTION to Appoint Counsel, filed by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard. Noted by Clerk for 11/13/2020. (PM) (Entered: 10/26/2020)

Oct. 23, 2020

Oct. 23, 2020

PACER
24

MOTION for Summary Judgment for Failure to Respond to Complaint Within a Reasonable Time, filed by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard. Noted by Clerk for 11/20/2020. (PM) (Entered: 10/26/2020)

Oct. 26, 2020

Oct. 26, 2020

PACER
26

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 25 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. (PM) cc: Plaintiff via USPS (Entered: 11/13/2020)

Nov. 13, 2020

Nov. 13, 2020

RECAP
27

ORDER granting the United States' 19 Motion for an extension of the deadline to file a responsive pleading on behalf of Defendants. Defendants shall file their responsive pleading not later than December 21, 2020. Plaintiff's motion for a default judgment (dkt. # 24 ) is STRICKEN as moot. Signed by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson.(PM) cc: Petitioner and U.S. Attorney's Office via USPS (Entered: 11/13/2020)

Nov. 13, 2020

Nov. 13, 2020

RECAP
28

MOTION to Appoint Counsel Due to COVID-19, filed by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard. Noted by Clerk for 1/1/2021. (PM) cc: Matt Waldrop via ECF ad hoc (Entered: 12/17/2020)

Dec. 16, 2020

Dec. 16, 2020

PACER

NOTICE re: Motion to Extend Deadline 19 . The appearance of attorney Matt Waldrop is not proper, and notices of electronic filing will not be sent until corrected. Signatures must be in accordance with FRCP 11 and LCR 83.2(a) and must comply with ECF Filing Procedures. (PM) cc: Matt Waldrop via ECF ad hoc

Dec. 17, 2020

Dec. 17, 2020

PACER

Note re compliance with LCR 83.2 - Attorney Appearance and With

Dec. 17, 2020

Dec. 17, 2020

PACER
29

NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Matt Waldrop on behalf of Defendants J Baltazar, Ian Conners, Maria Dy, Dan Sproul. (Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 12/18/2020)

Dec. 18, 2020

Dec. 18, 2020

PACER
30

MOTION to Dismiss, filed by Defendants J Baltazar, Ian Conners, Maria Dy, Dan Sproul. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 1/15/2021, (Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 12/21/2020)

Dec. 21, 2020

Dec. 21, 2020

PACER
31

DECLARATION of Matt Waldrop filed by Defendants J Baltazar, Ian Conners, Maria Dy, Dan Sproul re 30 MOTION to Dismiss (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 12/21/2020)

Dec. 21, 2020

Dec. 21, 2020

PACER
32

RESPONSE, by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard, to 30 MOTION to Dismiss. (PM) (Entered: 01/11/2021)

Jan. 7, 2021

Jan. 7, 2021

PACER
33

REQUEST by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard for Copy of 32 Response to re 30 MOTION to Dismiss. (PM) (Clerk sent copy of 32 Response to Plaintiff via USPS) (Entered: 01/11/2021)

Jan. 7, 2021

Jan. 7, 2021

PACER
34

REPLY, filed by Defendants J Baltazar, Ian Conners, Maria Dy, Dan Sproul, TO RESPONSE to 30 MOTION to Dismiss (Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 01/15/2021)

Jan. 15, 2021

Jan. 15, 2021

PACER
35

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 28 Second Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. (PM) cc: Plaintiff via USPS (Entered: 01/28/2021)

Jan. 28, 2021

Jan. 28, 2021

Clearinghouse
36

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 30 MOTION to Dismiss. Objections should be filed with the Clerk and served upon all parties to this suit within twenty-one (21) days of the date on which this Report and Recommendation is signed. Objections to be noted for the third Friday after they are filed. This matter will be ready for consideration on 4/2/2021. Signed by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Proposed Judgment) (PM) cc: Plaintiff via USPS (Entered: 03/10/2021)

March 10, 2021

March 10, 2021

Clearinghouse
37

MOTION Seeking Clarification and to Amend Complaint, filed by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard. Noted by Clerk for 4/2/2021. (PM) (Entered: 03/15/2021)

March 13, 2021

March 13, 2021

PACER
38

MOTION for Extension of Time to Object to Report and Recommendations, filed by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard. Noted by Clerk for 4/9/2021. (LH) (Entered: 03/26/2021)

March 25, 2021

March 25, 2021

PACER
39

ORDER granting in part Plaintiff's 38 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff's Objections to 36 R&R due on or before 4/30/2021. A party filing an objection must note the matter for the Court's consideration 14 days from the date the objection is filed and served. This matter is noted for 5/3/2021 as ready for consideration if no objection is filed. Plaintiff's 37 Motion for Clarification and Leave to Amend Complaint is DENIED. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (PM) cc: Plaintiff via USPS (Entered: 04/09/2021)

April 9, 2021

April 9, 2021

Clearinghouse
40

OBJECTIONS by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard to 36 Report and Recommendation. Noted by Clerk for 5/10/2021 5/7/2021 per 39 Order. (PM) Modified on 5/3/2021 to renote, per direction of chambers. (Entered: 04/28/2021)

April 26, 2021

April 26, 2021

PACER

Noting Date Reset re 40 OBJECTIONS by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard to 36 Report and Recommendations: Noting Date 5/10/2021, per 40 Order. (PM)

May 3, 2021

May 3, 2021

PACER

Set/Reset Motion Noting Date (Public, notice to parties)

May 3, 2021

May 3, 2021

PACER
41

RESPONSE to 40 OBJECTIONS by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard to 36 Report and Recommendations,. filed by Defendants J Baltazar, Ian Conners, Maria Dy, Dan Sproul (Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 05/10/2021)

May 10, 2021

May 10, 2021

PACER
42

REPLY by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard to 30 MOTION to Dismiss. (PM) (Entered: 06/07/2021)

June 5, 2021

June 5, 2021

PACER
43

SURREPLY filed by Defendants J Baltazar, Ian Conners, Maria Dy, McDermont, Dan Sproul re 40 OBJECTIONS by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard to 36 Report and Recommendations,., 36 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 30 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Maria Dy, J Baltazar, Dan Sproul, Ian Conners, 14 Amended Complaint filed by Robert Allen Stanard. (Waldrop, Matt) (Entered: 06/14/2021)

June 14, 2021

June 14, 2021

PACER
44

ORDER ADOPTING 36 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Defendants' motion to dismiss, Dkt. # 30, is GRANTED. Plaintiff's amended complaint and this action are DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (MW) (cc: Plaintiff via USPS) (Entered: 07/01/2021)

July 1, 2021

July 1, 2021

Clearinghouse
45

JUDGMENT BY COURT: The Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted. Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted, and Plaintiff's amended complaint and this action are dismissed with prejudice. (MW) (cc: Plaintiff via USPS) (Entered: 07/01/2021)

July 1, 2021

July 1, 2021

PACER
46

NOTICE OF APPEAL to Ninth Circuit (21-35582) re 45 Judgment by Court, 44 Order on Report and Recommendation, by Plaintiff Robert Allen Stanard. IFP granted on 10/17/2019. (cc: USCA) (RE) Modified on 7/23/2021 add CCA # (CDA). (Entered: 07/20/2021)

July 19, 2021

July 19, 2021

PACER
47

TIME SCHEDULE ORDER ( #21-35582) as to 46 Notice of Appeal filed by Robert Allen Stanard (CDA) (Entered: 07/23/2021)

July 22, 2021

July 22, 2021

PACER
48

ORDER OF USCA (21-35582) as to 46 Notice of Appeal filed by Robert Allen Stanard. (RE) (Entered: 01/28/2022)

Jan. 27, 2022

Jan. 27, 2022

PACER
49

OPINION OF USCA (21-35582/NOT THE MANDATE) as to 46 Notice of Appeal filed by Robert Allen Stanard. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. (CR) (Entered: 12/13/2023)

Dec. 11, 2023

Dec. 11, 2023

PACER
50

Order of USCA

Jan. 23, 2024

Jan. 23, 2024

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: Washington

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Hepatitis C Treatment in Jails and Prisons

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 30, 2019

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

An inmate who contracted Hepatitis C at a Bureau of Prisons facility and sought medical treatment while in custody.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: Yes

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

The Federal Detention Center, SeaTac, Federal

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

General/Misc.:

Conditions of confinement

Neglect by staff

Affected Sex/Gender(s):

Male

Medical/Mental Health Care:

Hepatitis