United States District Court, D. Connecticut
ANDRES J. ACEVEDO, Plaintiff,
DEBBIE WILSON, et al., Defendants.
INITIAL REVIEW ORDER PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §
Jeffrey Alker Meyer United States District Judge.
Andres J. Acevedo is confined at the Cheshire Correctional
Institution. He has filed a complaint pro se and
in forma pauperis under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Plaintiff names two defendants, Nurse Debbie Wilson and Dr.
Ruiz. He seeks damages as well as declaratory and injunctive
relief. After an initial review, the Court concludes that the
complaint should be served on defendant Wilson; the claim
against defendant Ruiz, on the other hand, will be dismissed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
following allegations from plaintiff's complaint are
accepted as true for purposes of the Court's initial
review. Plaintiff has suffered from eye pain and blurred
vision with flashes of light for two years. Doc. #1 at 3
(¶ 6). In September 2015, plaintiff submitted a request
to the medical department at Cheshire Correctional to address
these issues. Id. at 3 (¶ 7). Dr. Ruiz, a
doctor stationed at Cheshire Correctional, then submitted a
request to the Utilization Review Committee seeking approval
for plaintiff to be seen by a specialist. Id. at 3
(¶ 9). The Utilization Review Committee decided to send
plaintiff to the ophthalmology department at the University
of Connecticut hospital. Ibid.
January 5, 2016, an ophthalmologist at the University of
Connecticut diagnosed plaintiff with cataracts and scheduled
him for surgery. Id. at 3 (¶ 10). On February
8, 2016, plaintiff underwent surgery, consisting of a lens
implant in his right eye. Id. at 3 (¶ 11).
Plaintiff had a follow-up visit the next day with the
surgeon, Dr. Ehlers. At this visit, plaintiff complained of
extreme pain. He received prescriptions for various eye
drops, ibuprofen, and Prilosec for pain and sickness.
Id. at 3-4 (¶¶ 12-14), 15.
inmates return from outside medical visits, they report to
the medical unit at Cheshire Correctional to discuss any
orders or prescriptions issued by the consulting physicians.
Id. at 4 (¶ 15). On February 9, 2016, after
returning from his follow-up visit with Dr. Ehlers, plaintiff
reported to the medical unit and met with defendant Wilson.
He gave defendant Wilson the paperwork and prescriptions
provided by Dr. Ehlers and had a brief conversation with her
before returning to his housing unit. Id. at 4
(¶ 16). Defendant Wilson was responsible for submitting
the prescriptions to the pharmacy. Id. at 6 (¶
February 10, 2016, plaintiff returned to the hospital for
another follow-up appointment, complaining of pounding pain
behind his eye. He was prescribed another eye drop.
Id. at 4 (¶ 17). On February 16, 2016,
plaintiff had another follow-up visit with Dr. Ehlers.
Ibid. Plaintiff told Dr. Ehlers that some of the
pain had subsided but that he was experiencing blurred and
hazy vision and a gritty feeling in his eye. Id. at
4 (¶ 19). Plaintiff was again prescribed eye drops.
Id. at 5 (¶ 20), 18.
March 24, 2016, at another appointment with Dr. Ehlers,
plaintiff complained of hazy vision and sensitivity to light,
which caused discomfort and headaches. Id. at 5
(¶ 21). Dr. Ehlers prescribed special glasses to address
these conditions. Ibid. When he returned to Cheshire
Correctional, plaintiff reported to the medical unit and met
with defendant Wilson. At this meeting, defendant Wilson
allegedly tore up and destroyed the prescription for special
glasses and told plaintiff he would not receive the glasses.
She did not provide a reason. Id. at 5 (¶¶
23- 26). Plaintiff also never received Prilosec, which had
been prescribed for sickness resulting from pain medication.
Id. at 6 (¶ 28).
12, 2016, after writing several requests to the medical unit
complaining of severe pain, headaches, and light sensitivity,
plaintiff submitted a grievance seeking a health service
review, requesting the special glasses that he had not
received, and requesting surgery to correct his hazy vision.
Id. at 6 (¶ 30), 20-21.
August 4, 2016, defendant Ruiz submitted a request to the
Utilization Review Committee for a YAG laser treatment to
correct plaintiff's hazy vision. Id. at 6
(¶ 32). On August 9, 2016, plaintiff submitted another
grievance seeking a health service review and requesting the
special glasses. Id. at 6 (¶ 32), 23-24.
Plaintiff never received the special glasses. Id. at
6-7 (¶ 33).
September 14, 2016, plaintiff had another appointment with
Dr. Ehlers. Dr. Ehlers requested an evaluation for YAG laser
treatment and prescribed artificial tears. Id. at 7
(¶¶ 34- 35). Upon returning to the correctional
facility, plaintiff submitted his paperwork and the
prescription for artificial tears to the medical unit.
Plaintiff never received the artificial tears. Id.
at 7 (¶ 37).
November 15, 2016, plaintiff was called to the medical unit
to have blood drawn, which is standard policy whenever an
inmate is scheduled for surgery. Id. at 7-8
(¶¶ 38-39). The following day, defendant Wilson
called plaintiff to the medical unit and informed him that
she had cancelled the surgery. Ignoring Dr. Ehlers'
recommendation, defendant Wilson told plaintiff that before
any surgery could be performed, he had to have someone at the
University of Connecticut determine whether the surgery was
medically necessary. Ultimately, plaintiff underwent the YAG
laser surgery. Id. at 8 (¶¶ 41-43).
lights in the correctional facility are on from 5:30 a.m.
until 11:00 p.m. Although plaintiff can turn off the light in
his cell, daylight still enters through the window to the
outdoors and the window in the cell door. Inmates are
forbidden from blocking the windows or hanging anything from
the bunk to block the light. As a result, plaintiff
constantly experiences debilitating pain from the light. The