IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF MARION 17CV14108 LOUIS WAYNE GALLIGAN,

Transcription

1 // 11:: AM CV11 """ ~o ~~;::O S: ai >aiai :=1<: Cl ai ~~ ~...J,.;i: " """ ;:;r; z..c ::: Q) e. - <e..-ai x - O>..c: ca "' :::, a_ LL J1l w """ IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF MARION CV11 LOUIS WAYNE GALLIGAN, [Personal Injuries/Negligence; U.S.C. Plaintiff, Sect. 1 (Civil Rights)] vs. Amount Pleaded: $1,. (Not Subject to Mandatory Arbitration) STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, a state agency, and, MARK NOOTH, MAHMOUD ALY, SERGIO CASTELLANOZ, OFC. D. THOMAS, and OFC. BERGMAN, individuals Defendants. Plaintiff alleges: 1. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Louis Wayne Galligan was and is a resident of Oregon. Plaintiff was and is an inmate at Snake River Correctional Institution ("SCRJ") in Ontario, Oregon.. At all times material herein, Defendant Oregon Department of Corrections ("ODOC") was and is a state agency charged with managing the prisons of the State of Oregon, including SCRI. ODOC is responsible for selecting, hiring, and training its correctional officers and prison employees. ODOC is also responsible for creating, enacting, and enforcing policies and PAGE 1 -

2 procedures related to all aspects of Oregon prisons, including those related to inmate safety. At 1 all times mentioned herein, ODOC was located in Marion County, Oregon. SRCI was managed by Superintended Mark Nooth acting under color and pretense oflaw, and under color of the statutes, regulations, policies, practices, customs, and usages of Defendant ODOC, and was acting within the course and scope of his employment.. At all relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant Sergeant Mahmoud Aly was employed by ODOC as a Sergeant at SCRI. During all times mentioned herein, Sergeant Aly was acting under color and pretense oflaw, and under color of the statutes, regulations, policies, practices, customs, and usages of Defendant ODOC, and was acting within the course and scope of his employment as a sergeant with Defendant ODOC At all relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant Officer Sergio Castellanoz was employed by ODOC as a correctional officer at SCRI. During all times mentioned herein, Officer Castellanoz was acting under color and pretense oflaw, and under color of the statutes, regulations, policies, practices, customs, and usages of Defendant ODOC, and was acting within the course and scope of his employment as a correctional officer with Defendant ODOC.. At all relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant Officer D. Thomas was employed by ODOC as a correctional officer at SCRI. During all times mentioned herein, Officer Thomas was PAGE - COMPLAJNT

3 1 acting under color and pretense oflaw, and under color of the statutes, regulations, policies, practices, customs, and usages of Defendant ODOC, and was acting within the course and scope of his employment as a correctional officer with Defendant ODOC.. At all relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant Officer Bergman was employed by ODOC as a correctional officer at SCRI. During all times mentioned herein, Officer Bergman was acting under color and pretense of law, and under color of the statutes, regulations, policies, practices, customs, and usages of Defendant ODOC, and was acting within the course and scope of his employment as a correctional officer with Defendant ODOC.. On April, 1 at SCRI, Plaintiff injured his left leg when a cable trapped his leg, severely injuring his left knee during a softball game, causing serious injuries that required medical treatment Plaintiff fell during his tum "at bat," after he hit the ball and began to run toward first base. As he stepped out of the batter's box and started to run full force, his ankle became entangled in a cable that connected the bat to a steel ring located between the pitcher's mound and home plate.. PAGE -

4 1 Plaintiffs left knee was fully extended while he was running. As his ankle was trapped by the cable, he heard a few loud pops before he fell onto his right side, screaming in pain. His left knee cap was sitting up on his thigh. 1. As Plaintiff lay on the ground in agony, CO Castellanoz and Sergeant Aly arrived at the scene. Sergeant Aly called for a medical response team from the prison hospital at S.R.C.I. Due to negligent maintenance, the electric cart ceased functioning halfway to the scene, resulting in a delay for the nurses to arrive. He was asked to stand to get onto a wheelchair, but the severity of his pain would not allow him to do so. The medical response team was unable to get a gurney to Sergeant Aly sent for a pair of scissors to allow the nurse to cut Plaintiffs pants to see the injury. At that point, it was determined an emergency room visit and ambulance transportation were necessary. 1. Plaintiff was left lying in the sun with no blanket for shock and no water while Officer Thomas and Officer Bergman arrived on scene to photograph him and the cables. Plaintiff witnessed Officer Bergman move and rearrange placement of the bat and cable prior to taking photographs of the bat and cable. I. PAGE -

5 'St ~o ~r=!~ s: a,mmo;> :::, ebro g,~~ o _J~ L..-- o~~ z.l:: - 'St I!) :: Q.).!!!.- <l'. ~ x... O>..c co (/) :,O.u.. ~w ~ 'St Plaintiff was transported by ambulance to St. Alphonsus Hospital, where he was diagnosed with a rupture of the patellar tendon and a rupture of the extensor mechanism, which required invasive surgery. 1. Plaintiff was placed in a full-length leg brace and returned to S.R.C.I to the Infinnary, where he was to remain until the institution's Dr. Gullick would visit him on April, 1. Dr. Gullick did not visit him on April th. 1. While at St. Alphonsus Hospital, the attending doctor spoke with Dr. Foote, who was going to be performing the surgery on April, 1. However, it was not until May 1, 1 that he was transported to Weiser Memorial Hospital for the surgery to be performed by Dr. Petersen. He was given no reason for the change in surgeons or for being forced to wait until May 1, 1 to have surgery instead of on April, 1.. From April, 1 through May 1, 1, he went without pain medication because he would have lost his place in the minimum-security facility if he chose to take the pain medication. Had he chosen to mitigate his pain with reasonable medication he would have put himself at great risk for violent injury at the maximum security facility. This unreasonable rule put him at a Hobbesian choice of pain versus risk of violence, which in a civil society is not a choice that should be placed on any human being, regardless of penal status. As a result, he was able to keep his spot in the minimum-security facility, but was in agonizing pain for 1 days until he was scheduled for surgery. PAGE -

6 1. Throughout Plaintiffs recovery, he received no physical therapy and now walks with a permanent limp with recurring pain, stiffness, and weakness in his knee, which prevents him from actively participating in sports and doing the labor intensive work he used to do at S.C.R.I. 1. Plaintiffs injuries have permanently disabl~d him, resulting in a loss of future earning capacity. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Negligence) (Against ODOC) Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 1 as though fully set forth herein.. Plaintiffs fall and subsequent injuries were caused by ODOC's negligence in one or more of the following particulars. (a) Failing to maintain the prison equipment in a reasonably safe manner; (b) Failing to adequately inspect the softball equipment and remove or repair any dangerous conditions; (c) Failing to recognize the dangerous condition of the cable; PAGE -

7 (d) Failing to correct the dangerous condition of the cable; '<t -~O ~ ~:: s: cuoicncn :::J CX)CO O j '~ ~ J~ L_-...- ~ z..c.'<ti!) a:: o Q) e~ <(... lii x _. O).c ro Cl) :::, Cl. u.. if]w '<t (e) Failing to protect Plaintiff from injury from dangerous conditions not readily apparent to him; (f) Failing to warn Plaintiff of the dangerous condition of the cable; (g) Failure to allow minimum security inmates to ingest pain medication; (h) Failure to adequately maintain the electric gurney. (i) Unreasonably delaying in treating Plaintiffs injuries. 1. ODOC owed Plaintiff a duty to protect him from physical injury.. ODOC knew or should have known that there was a substantial risk that Plaintiff would be injured by the cable and his pain would be prolonged due to treatment.. ODOC' s negligence as alleged herein was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff to suffer pennanent and disabling injuries to his left knee. His injuries have caused and will continue to cause Plaintiff future pain, discomfort and interference with his nonnal and usual activities. For these losses, Plaintiff is entitled to non-economic damages in a reasonable amount to be determined by a jury not to exceed $,.. Defendants' negligence caused Plaintiff to incur medical expenses in an amount not exceeding $1,. and will require Plaintiff to incur future medical and medical-related expenses in the amount which will be proven at trial. PAGE -

8 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 1 (Violations of th Amendment Right Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment and the 1 th Amendment Right Against Deprivation of Life and Liberty) (Against All Defendants) Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs I through 1 as though fully set forth herein. Defendants violated Plaintiff's civil rights by acts or omissions sufficiently harmful to g 11 evidence deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. '<t They also intentionally interfered with Plaintiff's medically prescribed surgery by delaying treatment. The defendants did not provide Plaintiff with reasonably adequate care, by: a. Failing to immediate summon a medical response team to provide aid to Plaintiff, despite obvious signs that Plaintiff had been seriously injured. b. Leaving Plaintiff on the ground in pain without water or shade for an hour. c. Failing to provide Plaintiff with the necessary surgery to repair his ruptured patella tendon within a reasonable time. d. Failing to provide Plaintiff with necessary surgical aftercare to aid his recovery. e. Failing to provide Plaintiff with post-operative physical therapy. PAGE - THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Failure to Provide Handicap Access to Facilities)

9 'SI"... 'SI" (Against ODOC) Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 1 as though fully set forth herein... ODOC failed to provide handicap access to the Donn 1 facilities while Plaintiff was recovering from surgery and was in rehabilitation. follows: WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for a judgment in his favor and against Defendants as (I) For his past medical expenses in an amount not exceeding $1,. and for future medical expenses in an amount to be proved at trial; () For non-economic damages in a reasonable amount to be determined by a jury not to exceed $,; () For loss of future earning capacity in an amount to be proved at trial; and () For attorney fees (associated with the Civil Rights claim), costs and disbursements incurred herein. DATED this th day of April,. ARNOLD LAW Michael Arnold, OSB #11 mike@amoldlawfirm.com Attorney for Plaintiff PAGE -