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.

Jessup v. County of Nassau

United States District Court, E.D. New York

October 9, 2014

COREY JESSUP, Plaintiff,
v.
COUNTY OF NASSAU, MICHAEL J. SPOSATO, Sheriff of Nassau County, ARMOR CORR. HEALTH SERVICES, INC., JOSE ARMAS, M.D., and VICKY HAILY, Administrator, Defendants.

Corey Jessup, pro se, Nassau County Correctional Center East Meadow, NY, for Plaintiff.

No appearances, Defendants.

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

JOANNA SEYBERT, District Judge.

By Memorandum and Order dated May 2, 2014, the Court granted the in forma pauperis application filed by incarcerated pro se plaintiff Corey Jessup ("Plaintiff") and dismissed his Complaint against Armor Corr. Health Service, Inc. and Vicky Haily with leave to file an Amended Complaint no later than May 30, 2014. On June 26, 2014, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint against the County of Nassau ("Nassau County"), Nassau County Sheriff Michael J. Sposato ("Sheriff Sposato"), "Armor Corr. Health Services, Inc." ("Armor"), Jose Armas, M.D. ("Dr. Armas"), and Vicky Haily, Administrator ("Haily" and collectively, "Defendants").

Even though Plaintiff's Amended Complaint was not timely filed, and Plaintiff has offered no explanation as to why it was filed approximately one month late, given Plaintiff's pro se status the Court has reviewed it pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Upon such review, the Court finds that Plaintiff has not alleged a plausible claim against any Defendant. Accordingly, the Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

BACKGROUND[1]

I. The Original Complaint

Plaintiff's sparse original Complaint, submitted on the Court's Section 1983 complaint form, alleged that Plaintiff was denied adequate medical care while incarcerated at the Nassau County Correctional Center (the "Jail"). (Compl. ¶ IV.) More specifically, Plaintiff alleged that he takes three doses of Dilantin daily to control his epilepsy but, on December 31, 2013, he was not given a dose until 3:20 p.m. (Compl. ¶ IV.) On January 1, 2014, Plaintiff claimed that he was not given his second dose of seizure medication and, as a result, "went into a seizure attack" that night. (Compl. ¶ IV.) Plaintiff also claimed that, on January 7, 2014, he was not given his seizure medication until 8:00 p.m. although he was supposed to take it at 2:00 p.m. (Compl. ¶ IV.) Accordingly, Plaintiff wrote to Haily "who [has] yet to answer my letter." (Compl. ¶ IV.) As a result, Plaintiff demands a damages award of $1 million for "frustration, anxiety, [and] inadequate health care[, ] that led to a seizure on 1-1-14." (Compl. ¶ V.)

II. The Amended Complaint

The Amended Complaint is an eighteen-page handwritten document that sets forth generalized grievances pertaining to medical care provided to inmates at the Jail. (See generally, Am. Comp., Docket Entry 7.) The gravamen of Plaintiff's claim is that the medical care provided at the Jail is different from-and less than-the medical care that would be available to a civilian in the community. According to Plaintiff, Armor is contractually responsible for the cost of "canes, wheelchairs, walkers, etc., emergency urgent critical diagnostic intervention[] and other care, with consultations, [ ] specialists, laboratories, and other community-based providers and hospitals..." and therefore Armor is motivated to reduce costs and has promulgated policies to prevent the prescription of such services to inmates. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 18-24.) Plaintiff also complains that Defendants have implemented the following policies as cost-saving measures: (1) in the Fall of 2013, Defendants ceased Tuberculosis screening for new inmates (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 33-35); (2) the Jail provides over-thecounter pain medication rather than prescription pain medication and that non-formulary medications are not prescribed to inmates, regardless of medical need (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 45-48); and (3) physical therapy and occupational therapy are not provided to inmates regardless of medical need (Am. Compl. ¶ 49).

Plaintiff generally alleges that he has "been denied emergency, diagnostic, acute, chronic, specialized & standard medical care that's available in the community." (Am. Compl. ¶ 26.) Nowhere in the Amended Complaint does Plaintiff include any allegations concerning the epileptic seizure that Plaintiff had originally claimed was the medical condition underlying his denial of adequate medical care claim. Nor does Plaintiff provide any facts pertaining to his conclusory allegation that he has been denied "medical care that is available in the community." (Am. Compl. ¶ 26.)

For relief, Plaintiff seeks an order, declaring the contract between the County and Armor void and to "reestablish there [sic] previous contract with ("N.U.M.C.") or to establish such other contract as shall be appropriate to provide the Plaintiff and all other inmates [ ] here aat NCCC with adequate medical care...." (Am. Compl. at 17-18.)

DISCUSSION

I. Application of 28 ...


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.