United States District Court, D. Connecticut
INITIAL REVIEW ORDER
C. Hall, United States District Judge
plaintiff, David Osuch (“Osuch”), was confined at
Osborn Correctional Institution (“Osborn”) when
he filed his pro se complaint, pursuant to section
1983 of title 42 of the United States Code, against Casey St.
John, MH-RN (“St. John”). On August 20, 2018, he
filed a Notice of a Change of Address indicating that he now
resides in Stamford, Connecticut.
reasons set forth below, the Complaint is dismissed.
Standard of Review
Pursuant to section 1915A(b) of title 28 of the United States
Code, 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.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). This
standard of review “appl[ies] to all civil complaints
brought by prisoners against governmental officials or
entities regardless of whether the prisoner has paid [a]
filing fee.” Shakur v. Selsky, 391 F.3d 106,
112 (2d Cir. 2004) (citation omitted).
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). Although 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). A complaint that
includes only “labels and conclusions, a formulaic
recitation of the elements of a cause of action or naked
assertions 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) (alterations omitted)). Although courts
interpret a pro se complaint liberally, the
complaint must still include sufficient factual allegations
to meet the standard of facial plausibility. See Harris
v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009).
alleges that, on January 29, 2018, prison officials at Osborn
released him “on Mental Health [U]nit Parole with a
Mental Health Parole officer to a work release Halfway
[House] in Hartford [called Cheney House].”
See Compl., (Doc. No. 1) ¶ 7. At the time of
his discharge, Osuch suffered from post-traumatic stress
disorder, bipolar disorder, major depression disorder,
borderline personality disorder, paranoid personality
disorder, and general anxiety disorder. Id. ¶
8. During Osuch's confinement at Osborn, Dr. Lawlor had
prescribed four medications to treat these disorders. See
Id. ¶¶ 12-13. Osuch claims that he cannot
function properly without the medications. Id.
State of Connecticut Department of Correction Administrative
Directive 8.1(6)(E), the Department of Correction and
“the contracted health services provider shall
designate a discharge planner for each [health services] unit
whose sole responsibilities shall be implementing the
discharge planning process.” See id. ¶
10. Upon discharge from the Department of Correction, inmates
“shall receive, at a minimum, a two-week supply of
medication packaged in a tamper proof container.”
Id. Administrative Directive 8.5(12)(C) similarly
provides that “[a] psychiatrist or APRN with
psychiatric certification shall order, no less than a 14 day
supply of all prescribed psychotropic medication to accompany
an inmate upon discharge, community supervision, [p]arole or
furlough.” See id. ¶ 11.
claims that St. John, who is a nurse at Osborn, is
responsible for assuring that Level 3 inmates are discharged
from the Department of Correction with their medications.
See id. ¶ 9. On January 29, 2018, prison
officials discharged Osuch without his mental health
medications. See id. ¶ 8.
his release, Osuch went to Cheney House and requested his
mental health medications. See id. ¶ 14. Staff
at Cheney House staff informed Osuch that they had only been
given medications to treat his medical conditions.
See id. Osuch traveled to Hartford Hospital
to speak to a doctor in an effort to get his medications.
See id. ¶ 15. A physician issued him a
prescription for his medications for three days. See
then traveled to the Wheeler Treatment Clinic to speak to a
doctor in an effort to get a prescription for his medications
when the three-day prescriptions ran out. See id.
¶ 16. He met with a social worker who had treated him
previously, and she assigned Osuch to a psychiatric nurse who
had also treated him previously. See Id. ¶ 17.
The earliest appointment available with the psychiatric nurse
was on March 21, 2018. See id. ¶ 17. Osuch
returned to the halfway house and informed the director, his
case manager, his parole officer, and his parole
officer's supervisor that he had been discharged without
his mental health medications and that he needed the
medications to function properly. See id. ¶ 18.
February 1, 2018, Osuch returned to Hartford Hospital to pick
up medications. See id. ¶¶ 19-20. An
emergency room doctor told Osuch that he must find another
mental health provider to treat him until his appointment
with the psychiatric nurse on March 21, 2018, because the
hospital could not keep filling his prescriptions. See
id. ¶ 20.
February 2, 2018, Osuch traveled to Charter Oak clinic.
See id. ¶ 21. He met with Dr. Pillai, a
physician who worked part-time at MacDougall Correctional
Institution. See id. ¶ 22. On February 6, 2018,
Osuch traveled to Hartford Hospital to pick up his
medication. See id. ¶ 23. An emergency room
doctor filled his prescription for one medication for three
days and the other three medications for a week. See
Id. ¶ 24. The physician told him that he must find
another mental health provider ...