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.

Michalski v. Ruiz

United States District Court, D. Connecticut

December 21, 2018

MARCO A. MICHALSKI, Plaintiff,
v.
DR. RICARDO RUIZ, et. al., Defendants.

          RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS

          VICTOR A. BOLDEN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Marco Michalski (“Plaintiff”), currently incarcerated at Osborn Correctional Institution, and proceeding pro se, has sued Dr. Ricardo Ruiz and Dr. Samuel Berkowitz (“Defendants”) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Mr. Michalski allegedly suffers from foot conditions, including club feet and flat feet, and claims that both defendants were deliberately indifferent to those conditions during his confinement at Cheshire Correctional Institution between September 2016 and September 2017.

         Pending before the Court are Mr. Michalski's motions for preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order, for a judgment on the pleadings, for service, and for default.

         For the following reasons, the Court DENIES the motions.

         I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         A. Factual Allegations

         Mr. Michalski has a history of foot issues. He claims to have clubfoot in both of his feet. Compl., at ¶ 5, ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”). Mr. Michalski also claims his feet are subject to deformities. Id. Later in life, his arches dropped, which he claims causes him constant pain and discomfort. Id. at ¶ 6. To address these issues, Mr. Michalski allegedly was prescribed arch supports along with stretching, strengthening, and conditioning exercises, which he says was ineffective in dealing with his pain. Id. at ¶ ¶ 7, 8.

         After seeing a doctor about the issues, Mr. Michalski was treated with steroid injections, physical therapy, and “quality footwear.” Id. at ¶ ¶ 10, 11. In the following eleven years, Plaintiff claims that he was able to stave off foot pain. Id. at ¶ 13.

         After his April 2013 incarceration, however, Plaintiff claims that his foot condition began to worsen. He claims that the low-quality shoes available to him in prison have led to foot issues because of a lack of support in the arch and ankle along with other prison conditions. Id. at ¶ ¶ 14-17. On or around September 2016, he requested medical attention. Id. at ¶ 18. During his wait for treatment, Plaintiff claims that his right foot became swollen and painful on multiple occasions. Id. at ¶ ¶ 21, 22.

         On January 18, 2017, Mr. Michalski submitted a grievance about his foot pain. Id. at ¶ 25.

         The next day, he saw Dr. Ruiz about blood test results for unrelated issues. Id. at ¶ 26. Mr. Michalski alleges that Dr. Ruiz did not examine his feet. Id. Nor did he x-ray or otherwise treat Plaintiff's foot issues. Id. Mr. Michalski claims that Dr. Ruiz rushed him out of the office when Plaintiff tried to tell him the doctor about his foot pain. Id. at ¶ 27.

         On February 15, 2017, Mr. Michalski submitted a complaint to the health service administrator of the prison about his foot pain. Id. at ¶ 29.

         On March 1, 2017, Mr. Michalski again saw Dr. Ruiz where Plaintiff detailed his history of foot problems. Id. at ¶ 30. Nine days later, Dr. Ruiz again met with Mr. Michalski and allegedly prescribed Plaintiff shoe inserts that Mr. Michalski claims were too big for him. Id. at ¶ 31, 32. Two weeks later Dr. Ruiz allegedly insisted that Plaintiff still buy shoes that were too big for him. Id. at ¶ 33.

         On March 30, 2017, Mr. Michalski filed another grievance about his foot pain. Id. at ¶ 38.

         On April 22, 2017, Mr. Michalski alleged filed another grievance. Id. at ¶ 39. Four days later, Mr. Michalski saw Dr. Ruiz, but the appointment was about the grievance and not foot treatment. Id. at ¶ 40.

         On May 2, 2017, Mr. Michalski submitted another grievance regarding his foot pain. Id. at ΒΆ 42. A few days later, Plaintiff was allegedly told he ...


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.