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.

Hill v. Malagori

United States District Court, D. Maryland, Southern Division

April 21, 2017

DENNIS HILL, Plaintiff,
v.
SUSAN K. MALAGORI, et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          GEORGE J. HAZEL United States District Judge.

         Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Dennis Hill's Complaint seeking injunctive relief against certain employees of the Montgomery County Correctional Facility. ECF No. 1. The Office of the Montgomery County Attorney has filed a Court-directed response, which has been supplemented. ECF Nos. 4 & 7. Plaintiff has replied. ECF Nos. 5 & 6. These issues have been fully briefed and a hearing is unnecessary. Foe. R. 105.6 (D. Md. 2016). For the reasons that follow. Plaintiffs request for injunctive relief shall be denied and the Complaint dismissed without prejudice.

         I. BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff, a pretrial detainee then confined at the Montgomery County Correctional Facility ("MCCF"). Filed correspondence with the Court which was construed as a civil rights complaint against Susan K. Malagori. Warden of MCCF. Dr. Howell, and Anthony Sturgis. Medical Director of MCCF. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff alleges that he is suffering from a "critical, life-threatening medical condition." ECF No. 1 at 1. He indicates that prior to his incarceration he consulted with a cardiothoraeic surgeon who indicated he required immediate surgery or he would die. Id. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to move forward with treatment of his condition but rather told him to "wail and see what happens." Id.

         By way of Affidavit. Plaintiff indicates that on October 19, 2016. he was taken to the Washington Adventist Hospital (WAN) for examination and diagnostic testing. ECF No. 3 at 1. The testing was done by Dr. Ali. who admitted Plaintiff to the hospital immediately due to the "extensive, critical and life threatening damage, revealed by the procedure." id. at 1-2. Dr. Ali. and Dr. Ijaz. consultants for MCCF, also consulted with Dr. Kathleen Petro. a cardiovascular surgeon. Id. at 2. The doctors described the severity of Plaintiffs condition and provided a treatment plan. Id. Plaintiff indicates that the doctors agreed that the damage was "critical, life-threatening, and should be treated by surgery immediately." Id. Plaintiff also notes that Dr. Petro indicated that the facilities at WAH were inadequate. Id. Dr. Petro recommended that the surgery take place at INOVA Fairfax Hospital in Virginia, where the proper team and facilities were available. Id. at 3. Dr. Petro offered to begin the process to have Plaintiff transported to INOVA Fairfax. Id. Plaintiff states that Dr. Petro stressed that the treatment and surgery were critical and time-sensitive, and that prolonging the decision-making process would compound the damage. id.

         Plaintiff states that Defendants refused to transport him out of state for treatment. Id. at 4. Plaintiff states that later that day he suffered another heart attack. Id. lie was transferred to Prince George's Medical Center, where lie was kept for observation for three weeks. Id. However. Plaintiff indicates that he received no corrective treatment for his blocked arteries and veins or for the tear in the "valve." Id. Plaintiff states that Defendants do not plan to seek any treatment or surgery for him. indicating instead that they intend to "wait and see what happens." Id. at 5.

         In their response to the request for emergeney injunctive relief, counsel for the MCCF indicates that on August 19. 2016. Plaintiff was initially processed at the Montgomery County Detention Center. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 4. During his initial medical screening. Plaintiff reported a history of several medical diagnoses and indicated that he was recently hospitalized for a defibrillator and pace maker implantation, id. ¶ 5: ECF No. 4-2 at 3. Medical staff obtained documentation from Anne Arundel Medical Center indicating Plaintiff suffers from: 1) coronary artery disease: 2) chest pain: 3) chronic systolic congestive heart failure: 4) essential hypertension: 5) history of DVT; and 6) Type II diabetes mcllitus. ECF No. 4-2 at 6.[1]

         On August 22. 2016, Plaintiff was transferred to MCCF to be housed on the specialized medical unit. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 6. Plaintiff was evaluated by Dr. Robert Younes on September 7. 2016. due to complaints of chest pain. hi. Dr. Younes ordered an expedited cardiology consult. id.

         Plaintiff was seen by Dr. Mohsin Ijaz. a cardiologist, on September 12. 2016. id. ¶ 7; ECF No. 4-3 at 4. Dr. Ijaz recommended medication changes, lab tests, a stress test, and a defibrillator evaluation. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 7: ECF No. 4-3 at 4. Dr. Ijaz also recommended that Plaintiff follow up with him in 1-2 weeks. ECF No. 4-1 <| 7: ECF No. 4-3 at 4.

         Plaintiff was evaluated by Dr. Younes on September 19, 2016. after which Dr. Younes recommended Plaintiff be transported to Holy Cross Germantown Hospital. ECF No. 4 at 3; ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 7. Plaintiff remained at the hospital until September 22, 2016. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 7.

         On September 27. 2016. Plaintiff was again evaluated by Dr. Ijaz and underwent a stress test evaluation without complications. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 7: ECF No. 4-3 at 3. Dr. Ijaz saw Plaintiff again on October 4. 2016, and recommended that a cardiac catheterization be scheduled within 1-2 weeks. FCF No. 4-1 ¶ 7; ECF No. 4-3 at 4.

         On October 20. 2016. Plaintiff was sent to WAH for the cardiac catheterization procedure. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 8: ECF No. 4-4. The catheterization was performed by Dr. AH. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 8: ECF No. 4-4. Dr. Ali recommended Plaintiff be referred for coronary artery bypass graphing (CABG) and mitral valve annuloplasty (MVA). ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 8: ECF No. 4-4 at 1. Plaintiff was subsequently evaluated by Dr. Kathleen Pctro. who indicated that due to Plaintiffs high risk status, the surgery could not be performed at WAH. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 8: ECF No. 4-5 at 2.

         Plaintiff was transferred to Prince George's County Hospital on October 21. 2016. to be evaluated by Dr. James Brown, a cardiothoracic surgeon. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 8: FCF No. 4-5 at 1. Plaintiff remained at Prince George's County Hospital until November 10. 2016. FCF No. 4-1 ¶ 8: FCF No. 4-5 at 1.

         On November 8. 2016. Plaintiff was sent to the University of Maryland Hospital for a viability study. ECF No. 4-1 ¶ 8: ECF No. 4-5 at 10-12: ECF 4-6 at 15. The results of the study were discussed among the physicians, including Dr. Brown, who determined Plaintiff was not a candidate for DABG/MVA. FCF No. 4-1 ¶ 8: ECF No. 4-5 at 13. Dr. Brown determined that Plaintiff was not a viable candidate for surgical revascularization ...


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.