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.

Jusino v. Frayne

United States District Court, D. Connecticut

January 3, 2018

JOSE A. JUSINO, Plaintiff,
v.
MARK FRAYNE, et al., Defendants.

          RULING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

          Michael P. Shea, United States District Judge.

         The plaintiff, Jose A. Jusino, commenced this civil rights action challenging his mental health treatment while incarcerated at Northern Correctional Institution in Somers, Connecticut. The plaintiff claims that the defendants, Mark Frayne, Gerard Gagne, Jr., Paul Chaplin, Craig Burns, and Scarlett Forbes, have been deliberately indifferent to his mental health needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The defendants move for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, the defendants' motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

         I. Facts

         On February 28, 2013, correctional staff at MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution (“MacDougall”) observed the plaintiff swallowing several pills. Dr. Naqvi saw the plaintiff, who refused to be evaluated. Dr. Naqvi sent the plaintiff to the emergency room. When he returned to the correctional facility, the plaintiff was placed on behavior observation status.

         On March 7, 2013, the plaintiff was transferred from MacDougall to Northern Correctional Institution (“Northern”). The transfer was based on the February 28, 2013 overdose and the fact that the plaintiff had set his mattress on fire. The assessment upon admission showed the plaintiff to be at risk of harm to himself and others. Dr. Frayne ordered the plaintiff admitted to the infirmary. He was assessed twice by mental health staff on March 7, 2013. Dr. Coleman recommended that mental health observation status be initiated.

         On March 8, 2013, the plaintiff was again evaluated by Dr. Frayne. The plaintiff expressed an intent to commit suicide. Dr. Frayne placed the plaintiff on suicide watch and ordered bag meals for the plaintiff's safety.

         On March 11, 2013, Dr. Frayne assessed the plaintiff and noted that he was exhibiting better control. Dr. Frayne reported that the plaintiff denied current thoughts of suicide. Dr. Frayne ordered that the plaintiff be closely monitored for two weeks. During March 2013, the plaintiff was on trial for murder and saw mental health staff consistently to deal with the stress of trial.

         On April 10, 2013, the plaintiff met with Dr. Gagne about his sentencing. Dr. Gagne noted that the plaintiff was calm, showing no distress, anger or anxiety. He expressed no suicidal or homicidal ideations. The same day, the plaintiff also was assessed by Dr. Frayne. The plaintiff made no threats of self-harm.

         On May 4, 2013, defendant Forbes met with the plaintiff. The plaintiff was stable, expressed no concerns for his safety, and displayed no signs of psychosis.

         At some point, the plaintiff asked to enroll in the “Start Now” program. The parties dispute whether, at some unspecified date, defendant Forbes told the plaintiff she was too busy or her caseload too large to allow her to meet with him every week.

         On June 18, 2013, the plaintiff was seen in the medical unit in response to reports that he was cutting himself. The plaintiff had superficial scratches on his left arm.

         Defendant Forbes met with the plaintiff on June 19, 2013, to discuss his refusals of mental health treatment. She encouraged the plaintiff to meet with her. In a medical incident report dated June 20, 2013, defendant Forbes noted that the plaintiff denied any current thoughts to hurt himself or others. Dr. Frayne ordered the plaintiff discharged to behavior observation status. Medical records show that the plaintiff was seen on June 22, 2013, and not seen again until November 2013.

         On November 8, 2013, a custody officer saw the plaintiff take a handful of green and yellow pills. The plaintiff was admitted to the hospital. Dr. Frayne completed a medical incident report on November 11, 2013. The plaintiff complained to Dr. Frayne that other inmates, assigned to the same clinician as he, were seen more frequently than he was. Dr. Frayne noted that the plaintiff presented no current risk of self-harm. Dr. Frayne ordered the plaintiff admitted to the medical unit on suicide observation and required follow-up daily tours by medical and mental health staff. The plaintiff was classified as a Special Needs Inmate at Northern.

         On November 14, 2013, Dr. Frayne met with the plaintiff and noted that he appeared acutely irritated and at risk to injure himself or staff. The plaintiff used obscene and insulting language toward Dr. Frayne. The plaintiff was described as expressing poor insight, impulse control, and problem solving. Dr. Frayne ordered the plaintiff to remain on suicide watch. That same day, the plaintiff attempted to injure himself. Nurse Scruggs described the injury as a superficial abrasion on his left forearm. On November 15, 2013, Dr. Frayne ordered the plaintiff to remain on suicide watch in the infirmary.

         On November 18, 2013, Dr. Frayne met with the plaintiff. The plaintiff denied suicidal ideation, plans, or intent. The plaintiff said that he felt much better and wanted to return to his regular cell. The plaintiff said that he would make a better effort to contact staff for help in the future. Dr. Frayne determined that the plaintiff's mental health status was baseline and ordered him discharged to population. Dr. Frayne saw the plaintiff the following day. The plaintiff denied any safety concerns.

         On November 27, 2013, the plaintiff met with defendant Forbes. At first, the plaintiff refused a one-on-one session. He was brought to the medical screening area where defendant Forbes was meeting with another inmate. The plaintiff waited for two minutes. He then became upset and asked the correctional officer to return him to his cell. The plaintiff told defendant Forbes that, if she was too busy to see him, she should not pull him from his cell. He did not think he should ...


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.