United States District Court, D. Maryland
DECONTEE S. GRANT
PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY DEPT., et al.
Deborah K. Chasanow United States District Judge
pending and ready for resolution in this civil rights case
are the following: (1) a motion to dismiss filed by Defendant
Jonathan Hill ("Defendant Hill") (ECF No. 13); (2)
a motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Doctor's Hospital,
Inc. ("Defendant Doctor's Hospital" or the
"hospital") (ECF No. 19); (3) a motion to dismiss
filed by Defendant Prince George's County Police
Department ("Defendant PGPD") (ECF No. 25); (4) a
motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary
judgment filed by Defendant Tisha S. Hillman ("Defendant
Hillman") (ECF No. 30); (5) a motion to dismiss filed by
Defendant Erick R. Tyrone ("Defendant Tyrone") (ECF
No. 32); and (6) a motion to compel filed by Plaintiff
Decontee S. Grant ("Plaintiff") (ECF No. 38). The
issues have been briefed, and the court now rules, no hearing
being deemed necessary. Local Rule 105.6. For the following
reasons, the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Hill will
be construed as a motion to quash service and will be
granted. The motion to dismiss filed by Defendant
Doctor's Hospital will be granted. Defendant PGPD's
motion to dismiss will be denied. Defendant Hillman's
motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary
judgment will be granted. Defendant Tyrone's motion to
dismiss will be granted. Plaintiff's motion to compel
will be denied as moot.
Allegations Against Defendants Doctor's Hospital and
otherwise noted, the facts outlined here are set forth in the
complaint and construed in the light most favorable to
Plaintiff. Plaintiff alleges that while unconscious during a
medical procedure on or about February 18 or 19, 2012, she
was sexually assaulted by the staff at Defendant Doctor's
Hospital. (ECF No. 16, at 10). Plaintiff contends that she
was subject to a "different, inferior, abusive, brutal[,
] and degrading treatment than that which Defendant
[Doctor's Hospital] gives to white female patients."
September 2012, Plaintiff reported the alleged sexual assault
to Defendant Detective J. Hill ("Defendant Hill"),
who contacted Defendant Doctor's Hospital. The hospital
informed Defendant Hill that Plaintiff was "knocked
out" for a pelvic exam and had woken up before the
doctors could start the second part of the exam.
(Id. at 3). Defendant Hill declined to conduct an
filed a grievance against Defendant Hill. (See Id.
at 5). In November 2012, Sergeant T. Nalley contacted
Plaintiff in response to her grievance. Plaintiff alleges
that Sergeant Nalley asked "where are you from?"
when asking for her personal information and said that he
would look at her medical record and make a decision.
(Id.). He subsequently closed her grievance.
December 2012, Plaintiff met with Lieutenant Webster
regarding her complaint against Defendant Doctor's
Hospital. Plaintiff informed Lieutenant Webster that
"several crucial pages of information for the time
interval of the sexual assault" were missing from the
copy of Plaintiff's patient record in Lieutenant
Webster's possession. (Id.). Plaintiff gave
Lieutenant Webster an updated copy of her medical record.
(Id. at 6). Upon Lieutenant Webster's inquiry,
Plaintiff disclosed that she had spoken with a lawyer but was
unable to pay for legal services. Plaintiff alleges that
Lieutenant Webster and another officer "exchanged
glances" and Lieutenant Webster refused to investigate
the sexual assault. (Id.).
filed a complaint for negligence, assault, and battery
against Defendant Doctor's Hospital in the Circuit Court
for Prince George's County. (ECF No. 19-2, at
On December 4, 2013 the circuit court granted a motion to
dismiss filed by Doctor's Hospital. (ECF No. 19-3, at 2).
2014, Sergeant B. Selway informed Plaintiff that he was
investigating her grievance against Defendant Hill. Plaintiff
gave Sergeant Selway a copy of her medical files. At a later
meeting, Plaintiff alleges that Sergeant Selway's
"face became angry when Plaintiff [spoke] about her
meeting with [Lieutenant] Webster." (Id. at 7).
Plaintiff alleges that PGPD personnel have interfered with
her grievances and investigation since then. Plaintiff
received a letter from Captain Rodriguez stating that her
grievance against Defendant Hill was closed. In November
2014, Sergeant Dillingham contacted Plaintiff regarding a
letter Plaintiff had sent to a United States Senator's
office. He informed Plaintiff that her complaint for sexual
assault would not be investigated because it had already been
closed by Lieutenant Webster. According to Plaintiff,
Defendant PGPD was "tracking, monitoring, and
intimidating Plaintiff . . . in order to keep the sex[ual]
assault case and subsequent cover-up from being
exposed." (Id. at 9). Plaintiff asserts that
she was re-victimized, treated as "an inferior class
person, " and "suffers from [a]nxiety,
sleeplessness, violation of her privacy, and violation of
trust in the public institution whose mission [it] is to
enforce the laws equally." (Id.).
Allegations against Defendants Hillman and Tyrone
about November 22, 2013 Plaintiff hired Defendants Hillman
and Tyrone to represent her in her civil case against
Defendant Doctor's Hospital in state court. Defendants
Hillman and Tyrone allegedly violated attorney-client
privilege by discussing Plaintiff's information while
acting as her attorney. Additionally, Plaintiff alleges that
Defendants Hillman and Tyrone demanded more money than was
agreed upon in their original contract and failed to notify
her about proceedings and decisions regarding her civil case.
(Id.). Plaintiff declined to enter into a new
October 2014, Plaintiff sought legal representation for her
state court case from "Attorney [B]." Plaintiff
alleges that after Attorney B had her files for two months
and spoke with Defendant Hillman, Attorney B's
"usually pleasant voice became accusatory, even sounding
angry at Plaintiff" and she refused to take the case.
(Id.). Plaintiff asserts that subsequently several
other attorneys initially accepted her case, but then changed
their minds and spoke to Plaintiff in "the same
accusatory tone as Attorney [B] did." (Id. at
13). In December 2014, "Attorney [C]" declined to
represent Plaintiff because the statute of limitations was
going to expire in February 2015. Plaintiff believes that
Defendants Hillman and Tyrone discouraged other attorneys
from taking her case. Plaintiff also alleges that when she
received her case files in the mail from Attorney B and
Attorney C, they were "torn open" or were
"slashed [open], " and that she "received an
unsigned Christmas card with no name, no note, and no return
address, [which was] another taunt." (Id.).
proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against
Defendants Doctor's Hospital, PGPD, Hill, Hillman, and
Tyrone on August 17, 2015. (ECF No. 1). On September 17,
Defendant Doctor's Hospital filed a motion to strike the
complaint and/or for a more definite statement (ECF No. 6),
and Plaintiff responded in opposition (ECF No. 15).
Defendants Hillman and Tyrone filed a motion to dismiss a
week later. (ECF No. 12). On September 25, Defendant Hill
filed a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 13). After each motion to
dismiss, Plaintiff was provided with a Roseboro
notice, which advised her of the pendency of the motion to
dismiss and her entitlement to respond within 17 days. (ECF
Nos. 11, 14); ...