United States District Court, D. Connecticut
INITIAL REVIEW ORDER
A. BOLDEN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Harris is incarcerated at the Cheshire Correctional
Institution. He has filed a Complaint under 42 U.S.C. §
1983 against Drs. Johnny Wu, Wright, Ruiz and John Does I and
II, Nurses Nancy Hill and Jane Does I and II and Health
Services Administrator Sharone Brown. For the reasons set
forth below, the Complaint is dismissed in part.
28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), the Court must review prisoner
civil complaints against governmental actors and
“dismiss ... any portion of [a] complaint [that] is
frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, ” or that “seeks monetary
relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief.” Id. Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure requires that a complaint contain “a
short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2).
detailed allegations are not required, “a complaint
must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to
state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. A
claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads
factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable
inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct
alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). A
complaint that includes only “‘labels and
conclusions, ' ‘a formulaic recitation of the
elements of a cause of action' or ‘naked
assertion[s]' devoid of ‘further factual
enhancement, ' ” does not meet the facial
plausibility standard. Id. (quoting Bell Atl.
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 557 (2007)).
Although courts have an obligation to “construe a
pro se complaint liberally, ” the complaint
must still include sufficient factual allegations to meet the
standard of facial plausibility. Harris v. Mills,
572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009) (citations omitted).
Harris was incarcerated at Northern Correctional Institution
in February 2014. On February 9, 2014, he was unable to
urinate. He alleges that he attempted to seek medical
assistance, but officers ignored his requests to be seen in
the medical department. Later that day, a lieutenant escorted
him to the medical department. Nurse Nancy Hill allegedly
examined Mr. Harris and accused him of deliberately causing
his symptoms. She allegedly believed that the cause of his
inability to urinate was the insertion of something into his
penis. Mr. Hill alleges that he repeatedly informed Nurse
Hill that he had not inserted anything into his penis.
Harris further alleges that Nurse Hill and Nurse Jane Doe I
attempted to insert a catheter into his penis to enable him
to urinate, but they were unsuccessful. Mr. Harris
experienced severe pain and humiliation during the attempts
to insert the catheter. A decision was made to transport Mr.
Harris to University of Connecticut Health Center
(“UCONN”) for treatment. Mr. Harris alleges that
the transport van had not been cleaned and contained residue
from a prior use of mace. This residue caused Mr. Harris to
cough and burned his eyes and throat.
UCONN, an urologist allegedly inserted a catheter into Mr.
Harris's penis and prescribed pain medication. Mr. Harris
alleges that he asked the officers who had transported him to
UCONN for a change of clothes because his clothes had been
soiled by urine. The officers informed Mr. Harris that the
hospital had no clothes to provide to him.
February 10, 2014, the urologist released Mr. Harris to be
returned to Northern. Officers placed Mr. Harris in the
in-patient medical unit at Northern upon his return from
Harris alleges that he quickly developed an infection in his
bladder and urethra. On February 11, 2014, medical personnel
at Northern transferred Mr. Harris to UCONN for treatment of
the infection. A medical staff member at UCONN allegedly
prescribed an antibiotic to treat the infection and released
Mr. Harris back to Northern. Upon his return to Northern,
officers placed Mr. Harris in the in-patient medical unit.
Some days later, when Mr. Harris was still using the
catheter, medical personnel released Mr. Harris to general
population. Mr. Harris claims that the conditions in general
population were unsanitary, which could have caused further
infections to his urethra or bladder.
point, Mr. Harris alleges, a medical staff member removed his
catheter. Because Mr. Harris had not regained normal function
of his urethra, a medical staff member informed him that an
urologist would examine and treat him. Prison officers
subsequently transported Mr. Harris to Yale-New Haven
Hospital to see Urologist Toby Chai. Dr. Chai informed Mr.
Harris that there was a blockage in his urethra. Dr. Chai
stated that there were several ways to reduce the blockage,
but that he recommended complete removal due to Mr.
Harris claims that Defendants would not schedule the surgery
until he had been sentenced. On February 7, 2014, Mr. Harris
pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit robbery
in the first degree. On May 28, 2014, in the Connecticut
Superior Court for the Judicial District of Milford, a judge
sentenced Mr. Harris to eighteen years of imprisonment,
execution suspended after eighteen months and followed by
five years of probation.
30, 2014, Dr. Chai performed a surgery to remove the blockage
in Mr. Harris's urethra. Mr. Harris claims that
immediately after the surgery he noticed that his penis
looked like it had been reduced in size. In addition, he
experienced other complications including “leakage,
burning during urination, ” and lack of “good
urine flow.” Compl., ECF No. 1 at 10, ¶¶
44-45. Dr. Chai informed Mr. Harris that these complications
would resolve in time.
Harris states that, at some point, prison officials
transferred him from MacDougall-Walker Correctional
Institution (“MacDougall-Walker”) to Garner
Correctional Institution (“Garner”). At Garner,
Mr. Harris allegesthat Drs. John Doe I and John Doe II failed
to thoroughly examine or treat him for infections and
urination issues. Neither doctor referred Mr. Harris to a
specialist, he alleges, even though his medical issues were
beyond their area of expertise. In 2015, Drs. John Doe I and
John Doe II arranged to have Mr. Harris transferred to
Cheshire Correctional Institution in retaliation for his
filing of grievances against them.
his confinement at Cheshire, Mr. Harris alleges, Dr. Ruiz and
Health Administrator Brown denied his requests for medical
treatment despite his complaints of lack of urine flow, a
burning sensation when urinating, and urine leakage. The
Utilization Review Committee allegedly denied Mr.
Harris's request for a consultation with an urologist.
Dr. Ruiz and Health Administrator Brown allegedly failed to
make further efforts to obtain the necessary approval for Mr.
Harris to be examined by an urologist. Mr. Harris alleges
that his injuries have “effected [his] ... mental