IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF MARION. Plaintiff, Defendants.

Transcription

1 // :0:0 PM CV1 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF MARION 1 KELLY NATHAN PREUITT, v. Plaintiff, OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, an agency of the State of Oregon, Defendants. Case No. CV1 COMPLAINT Negligence; Medical Malpractice (Not Subject to Arbitration) Amount Claimed: $,000,000 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL For his complaint, Plaintiff brings allegations against the Oregon Department of Corrections and those who, in the scope of their employment with the Department of Corrections at department facilities, with negligence and/or gross negligence, failed to provide Plaintiff with necessary care and necessary medical care. Page 1 COMPLAINT JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Plaintiff, Kelly Preuitt, is an incarcerated resident of the State of Oregon and at all times relevant was an inmate and in the custody of the Oregon Department of Corrections. All acts, transactions, and occurrences took place at the Oregon Department of Corrections ( ODOC ) Hub and Coffee Creek Correctional Facility ( CCCF ). ODOC was and is a state agency charged with managing the prisons of the State of Oregon, including CCCF.. TELEPHONE (0) -0 - FAX (0) lnfo@lafky.com

2 1 ODOC administrative offices are located in the City of Salem, County of Marion and State of Oregon. Page COMPLAINT. At all material times ODOC acted through its agents and employees who at all material times acted within the course and scope of their agency and employment. Plaintiff provided ODOC a timely tort claim notice on or about October, to the Oregon Department of Administrative Services in Salem, Oregon.. Plaintiff filed a complaint for negligence and medical negligence claims against ODOC in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon on or about May 1,. this complaint. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. Plaintiff alleges and incorporates the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through of. Plaintiff is and has been an inmate in the custody of ODOC since. Plaintiff is diabetic; suffers from serious circulatory problems in his feet and toes associated with diabetes; and wears a size fifteen () shoe.. Because of his serious circulatory problems associated with diabetes, Plaintiff must wear specialized and proper fitting footwear.. On or about May,, Plaintiff was transferred from Deschutes County Jail to CCCF in Wilsonville, Oregon via the ODOC Hub in Salem, Oregon. Prior to this transfer, Plaintiff had been prescribed specialized footwear to manage his diabetes related circulatory problems. Upon TELEPHONE (0) -0 - FAX (0) lnfo@lafky.com

3 1 his transfer, Plaintiff s specialized footwear was taken from him and was bagged at the Hub, and Plaintiff was issued a pair of size nine () shower shoes. The issued footwear did not fit Plaintiff and was extremely tight and constricting. Plaintiff complained and explained that his toes would swell, blister, and split and that he could lose his toes if he was forced to continue wearing the issued shower shoes. Plaintiff asked to keep his specialized footwear, but his request was denied. Regarding the issued shower shoes, Plaintiff was told by ODOC personnel, size nine () was as large as was available. At the Hub, ODOC personnel knew or should have known of Plaintiff s condition and need for specialized footwear. Page COMPLAINT. When Plaintiff arrived at CCCF, he requested of ODOC personnel that his specialized footwear be returned and explained that if he were required to continue to wear the size nine shower shoes that he could lose his toes. Plaintiff requested that ODOC personnel review his medical records to verify that he was diabetic and that he had problems with circulation in his feet and explained his medical condition in detail. The corrections officer at the time put Plaintiff s specialized footwear on a shelf and told Plaintiff he would let medical make the decision about whether Plaintiff could have his specialized footwear. After several minutes, Plaintiff was informed he could not have his specialized footwear. At CCCF intake, ODOC personnel knew or should have known of Plaintiff s condition and need for specialized footwear.. Upon medical examination at CCCF, Plaintiff explained his footwear and foot problem to the nurse examining him. The nurse told Plaintiff that he would see a doctor the following day. In the meantime, Plaintiff s request for his specialized footwear was denied, and Plaintiff was not allowed to wear socks only. Plaintiff was ordered to continue wearing the size nine () shower shoes. 1. The following day, Plaintiff explained his footwear and foot problem to the doctor on TELEPHONE (0) -0 - FAX (0) lnfo@lafky.com

4 1 duty. The doctor did not bother to examine Plaintiff s feet. The doctor did, however, tell Plaintiff that he would order shoes for him. By the afternoon of that day, Plaintiff s feet had started to swell and blister, split and bleed. Plaintiff showed this to a CCCF officer on duty, but nothing was done to address the problem. A few days later, Plaintiff was seen by another doctor who told Plaintiff he was to continue to wear the size nine () shower shoes until the new shoes arrived. The doctor ordered that Plaintiff s feet were to be dressed and that the dressings were to be changed daily. The condition of Plaintiff s feet continually worsened and CCCF medical staff did not bother to consistently follow proper medical procedure after unwrapping and re-wrapping them. Page COMPLAINT.. Finally, Plaintiff s feet became so badly infected that Plaintiff removed a bandage to show one of the correction officers at CCCF. The officer immediately had Plaintiff escorted to medical. Two doctors observed Plaintiff s feet; acknowledged there was a serious problem; and consulted a third doctor. The three doctors concurred Plaintiff should be transported to the emergency department at Meridian Park Hospital.. On or about May,, Plaintiff was hospitalized at Meridian Park Hospital. A hospital note from the same date indicates Plaintiff presented to the emergency department from CCCF for evaluation and management of approximately two weeks of gradually worsening wounds/diabetic foot ulcers of his feet. Plaintiff reported his specialized footwear had been taken away from him at CCCF two weeks prior and that by the next day, his feet (especially his toes, bilaterally) were swollen and red. Except for dressing changes, Plaintiff reported no care of the steadily worsening ulcers. By the time Plaintiff reached Meridian Park Hospital, he had diabetic foot ulcers, gangrene, sepsis, cellulitis, accumulated necrotic tissue and was in need of intravenous antibiotics due to infection. TELEPHONE (0) -0 - FAX (0) lnfo@lafky.com

5 1 Page COMPLAINT. After several days of receiving intravenous antibiotics, it was determined by Meridian Park medical staff that infection had reached Plaintiff s bones; thus, requiring amputation of Plaintiff s right first and second toe and left first toe.. Medical staff at Meridian Park Hospital expressed outrage that Plaintiff s condition had been allowed to deteriorate to the point where amputation was necessary. Had ODOC/CCCF provided Plaintiff with adequate footwear and/or not required him to wear size nine () shoes, which cut off his circulation, the injury and resulting amputation would not have occurred. Medical staff at Meridian Park Hospital expressed concern about releasing Plaintiff back to ODOC/CCCF in light of the grossly negligent care he had received there and would not do so until they received assurance Plaintiff would receive appropriate and proper medical treatment following his amputations.. Because of Plaintiff s diabetes, his healing process and ability to walk was significantly slower than normal. During his healing process when Plaintiff would attempt to stand, the wounds on his feet would split open. The physical healing process for Plaintiff was arduous and excruciating.. To exacerbate the harm to Plaintiff, ODOC agreed to provide specialized footwear to Plaintiff, but required that Plaintiff pay for these very expensive shoes.. Due to the negligence and/or gross negligence of ODOC/CCCF personnel, physicians and nurses to Plaintiff s medical condition, Plaintiff has suffered permanent disfigurement, extreme emotional distress and is permanently disabled.. TELEPHONE (0) -0 - FAX (0) lnfo@lafky.com

6 1 The harm to Plaintiff s feet caused by defendant is ongoing, as Plaintiff has been required to undergo further medical and amputation procedures. Page COMPLAINT CLAIMS FOR RELIEF FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Negligence) Plaintiff restates and incorporates here the allegations in paragraphs 1 through. Defendant, by and through its agents and employees, owed to Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care; a duty to protect Plaintiff s constitutional rights; and a duty to protect Plaintiff as per the ODOC Code of Ethics.... Defendant breached its duty by, including but not limited to, failing and/or refusing to provide Plaintiff with adequate footwear given his shoe size and/or medical condition; failing and/or refusing to adequately address Plaintiff s concerns about his feet and issued footwear; requiring Plaintiff to wear size nine shower shoes; failing and/or refusing to allow Plaintiff to go without the restricting size nine footwear; and allowing these acts and/or omissions to continue for a period long enough to cause irreversible harm to Plaintiff.. As a direct and proximate cause of the Defendant s negligence and/or gross negligence and the actions/inactions alleged herein, Plaintiff suffered protracted and permanent injuries to his feet/toes that have and will cause him loss of work productivity, limitations on his occupational endeavors, and enjoyment of his life as well as need for future medical care indefinitely in an amount to be proven as economic damages at trial. Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer permanent injury, pain, difficulty walking, difficulty sleeping, anxiety, TELEPHONE (0) -0 - FAX (0) lnfo@lafky.com

7 1 discomfort, frustration at being unable to access adequate medical care, fear and emotional harm, all for which plaintiff seeks compensation. Plaintiff s non-economic damages are in an amount not to exceed $,000,000, and to be proven with particularity at trial. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Negligence Medical Malpractice) Plaintiff restates and incorporates here the allegations in paragraphs 1 through. ODOC employees are medical professionals employed and/or contracting with ODOC to provide competent medical care to inmates at the ODOC commensurate with reasonable standards of care in the community. ODOC employees are licensed medical providers with the Oregon Medical Board and/or Oregon Nursing Board. As such, ODOC employees owed a duty of reasonable professional care to Plaintiff who was a prisoner at the CCCF a correctional institution administered by ODOC. ODOC employees owed to Plaintiff a duty of care commensurate with the standard of care ordinarily used by health care providers in the community.... Plaintiff sought medical treatment with each of the ODOC employees and created a patient-medical provider relationship with each. ODOC employees failed to use reasonable medical care and judgment in Plaintiff s treatment and failed to treat Plaintiff s complaints and condition. Plaintiff s resulting injuries were reasonably foreseeable given the training and experience of ODOC employees. ODOC medical providing employees were negligent in the following particulars by: A. Refusing and/or failing to identify need to provide Plaintiff with appropriate footwear; B. Refusing and/or failing to review Plaintiff s prior medical records relating to his Page COMPLAINT TELEPHONE (0) -0 - FAX (0) lnfo@lafky.com

8 1 Page COMPLAINT foot condition and footwear needs; C. Refusing and/or failing to review other documentation evidencing Plaintiff s medical need for special footwear; D. Refusing and/or failing to provide Plaintiff with appropriate footwear; E. Refusing and/or failing to properly monitor Plaintiff s deteriorating foot condition; F. Failing to identify infection in Plaintiff s feet and toes before amputation became unavoidable; G. Failing to identify necrotic tissue on Plaintiff s feet and toes before amputation became unavoidable; H. Refusing and/or failing to treat infection in Plaintiff s feet and toes before amputation became unavoidable; I. Refusing and/or failing to treat necrotic tissue on Plaintiff s feet and toes before amputation became unavoidable; J. Failing to transport Plaintiff to the hospital before amputation became unavoidable; and/or K. Continuing to neglect Plaintiff s medical condition such that further amputation procedures were required.. As a direct and proximate result of ODOC employees negligence, Plaintiff s feet and toes were permanently injured and Plaintiff has and will suffer damages as alleged in is First Claim herein. follows: DEMAND FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for a judgment in his favor and against defendants as 1. For his first claim for relief: TELEPHONE (0) -0 - FAX (0) lnfo@lafky.com

9 1 a. Economic damages including the cost of future medical care to be proven with particularity at trial; b. Noneconomic damages in an amount not to exceed $,000,000; c. Costs and disbursements; and d. Such other relief including punitive damages as may appear just, equitable and appropriate.. For his second claim for relief: a. Economic damages including the cost of future medical care to be proven with particularity at trial; b. Noneconomic damages in an amount not to exceed $,000,000; c. Costs and disbursements; and d. Such other relief including punitive damages as may appear just, equitable and appropriate. Dated this th day of May. /s/ R. Grant Cook R. Grant Cook, #00 Lafky & Lafky Court Street NE Salem, OR 01 Telephone: (0) -0 Attorneys for Plaintiff Kelly Preuitt. Page COMPLAINT TELEPHONE (0) -0 - FAX (0) lnfo@lafky.com