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.

Hollis v. Hawk

United States District Court, D. Maryland

July 1, 2019

STEVEN T. HOLLIS, III, Plaintiff
v.
DAWN HAWK, et al., Defendants

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Paula Xinis United States District Judge.

         Self-represented Plaintiff, Steven Hollis, filed the above-captioned civil rights action against Defendants Wexford Health Sources, Inc. (“Wexford”) and Dawn Hawk. Hollis challenges the medical treatment he received following his complaints of a swollen scrotum. ECF No. 1. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 9, and Hollis filed a Response in Opposition, ECF No. 14. On the Court's instruction, Defendants also addressed the timing of Plaintiff's filing of the Complaint, to which Hollis responded. ECF Nos. 20, 21. The matter is now ripe for review, with no need for a hearing. See Local Rule 105.6. For the reasons that follow, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as to Defendant Wexford and DENIED as to Defendant Hawk.

         I. Background

         Hollis alleges that on August 9, 2015, he sought medical attention from Nurse Dawn Hawk at North Branch Correctional Institution for a swollen scrotum. He states:

4. I was physically walked, almost carried to the medical office by some officers on the 3-11 shift from the housing unit 2-A-tier dayroom.
5. Upon my arrival I was ungreeted by the nurse know in this lawsuit as Dawn Hawk.
6. Before struggling to take a seat she said she wasn't looking at my scrotum to see how severely swollen it was, she wasn't touching it, and not sending me out to get it looked at.
7. She told [Correctional Officer] Beasom to give me a pack of ice and she would bring the [ibuprofen] down.
8. The camera will show [Officer] Beasom giving me a[n] ice bag and then later on coming to the cell tossing [ibuprofen] to me on the top bunk.
9. The next morning when I was getting ready to pray, I smelled a[n] awful smell. I looked down and blood was running down my leg. . . . I was seen by medical and the nurse said that I had a[n] abscess and the medication that was given to the police to give me caused it to burst.

ECF No. 1 at 2.

         Defendants move to dismiss the Complaint as barred by limitations. ECF No. 9-2 at 2-3; ECF No. 20. Defendant Wexford additionally contends that dismissal is warranted because Hollis has failed to aver plausibly any facts supporting liability as to the institution. ECF No. 9-2 at 3-4. Defendant Hawk contends that dismissal is warranted as to her because the Complaint, at best, states a claim for medical negligence and not deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. Id. at 4.

         II. Standard of Review

         A motion to dismiss brought pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) tests the sufficiency of the complaint. Presley v. City of Charlottesville, 464 F.3d 480, 483 (4th Cir. 2006) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). A complaint need only satisfy the standard of Rule 8(a), which requires a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). “Rule 8(a)(2) still requires a ‘showing,' rather than a blanket assertion, of entitlement to relief.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 n.3 (2007). That showing must consist of more than “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action” or ...


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.