TAYLOR v. REAGLE

District Court, S.D. Indiana·Decided March 22, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-02169·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

QUENTIN L. TAYLOR, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:22-cv-02169-SEB-KMB ) DENNIS REAGLE, ) CENTURION HEALTH, ) AKILAH LAMAR, ) ARYANNA MOSS, ) JERMY LAREAU, ) WILLIAM, ) CAMPBELL, ) ) Defendants. )

Order Screening Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings Plaintiff Quentin Taylor is a prisoner currently incarcerated at Pendleton Correctional Facility ("Pendleton"). He filed this civil action alleging that he has not received adequate treatment for his mental and medical health needs. Because the plaintiff is a "prisoner," this Court has an obligation to screen the complaint before service on the defendants. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), (c). I. Screening Standard When screening a complaint, the Court must dismiss any portion that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). To determine whether the complaint states a claim, the Court applies the same standard as when addressing a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). See Schillinger v. Kiley, 954 F.3d 990, 993 (7th Cir. 2020). Under that standard, a complaint must include "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). "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). The Court construes pro se complaints liberally and holds them to a "less stringent

standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers." Cesal v. Moats, 851 F.3d 714, 720 (7th Cir. 2017). II. The Complaint Mr. Taylor names seven defendants in his complaint: (1) Dennis Reagle, warden of Pendleton; (2) Centurion Health, the contractor that provides medical care services for the Indiana Department of Correction ("IDOC"), including services at Pendleton; (3) Dr. Akilah LaMar, a psychologist at Pendleton; (4) Aryanna Moss, a mental health professional at Pendleton; (5) Jeremy LaReau, a mental health professional at Pendleton; (6) Sergeant Williams; and (7) Officer Campbell. Warden Reagle and Centurion Health are sued in their individual and official capacities. The remaining defendants are sued in their individual capacities only. Mr. Taylor seeks money

damages and injunctive relief. He bases his complaint on the following allegations: On January 3, 2022, Mr. Taylor had a mental health breakdown and was placed on suicide watch/observation. He was removed from suicide watch the next day. The day after that, Mr. Taylor was moved to G Cellhouse, a restrictive housing/segregation unit. He was not properly evaluated by mental health staff before being moved. At the time Mr. Taylor was placed in restrictive housing, he had mental health diagnoses of major depression, anxiety, antisocial personality disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder. Mr. Taylor alleges that those diagnoses classify him as seriously mentally ill and that Dr. LaMar gave him a mental health status classification code of "D." Mr. Taylor alleges that he is considered a high risk for suicide because of previous attempts and self-harming behavior, along with countless placements on suicide watch. Mr. Taylor was also admitted into a mental health treatment facility before being transferred to Pendleton. While housed in restrictive housing, Mr. Taylor was subjected to extreme isolation and

sensory deprivation. He was denied all recreation and out-of-cell time for three months, only received three showers a week, had access to extremely limited property, could not access the commissary, had no television, had no job opportunities, and had limited programming opportunities. Mr. Taylor began to have mental health struggles and began writing mental health staff. He asked to be seen out of his cell. His requests were ignored or denied. The extreme isolation and sensory deprivation caused Mr. Taylor to feel overwhelmed, and he experienced severe stress, major depression, anxiety, insomnia, suicidal thoughts, and thoughts of self-harm. He struggled with paranoid thoughts and was afraid to leave his cell for weeks. He told Dr. LaMar, Ms. Moss, and Mr. LaReau about his problems verbally and in writing, but he was ignored.

On April 10, 2022, Mr. Taylor had another mental health breakdown and felt suicidal. He was placed on suicide watch/observation. He told Ms. Moss and Mr. LaReau that the conditions in restrictive housing were having a negative effect on his mind and causing his mental health conditions to deteriorate. They did not try to protect Mr. Taylor or act to protect him from further harm. In early May 2022, Mr. Taylor began to experience serious mental health issues. He wrote mental health staff and Defendants multiple times and told them about his mental health struggles. He told them he was having overwhelming suicidal thoughts and asked to be see outside of his cell because his mental health had deteriorated significantly. His requests were ignored or denied. On May 11, 2022, Mr. Taylor wrote out a "do not resuscitate" order, telling the IDOC and medical providers not to attempt to resuscitate him in the case of a serious emergency, death, or suicide attempt. Because of this document and Mr. Taylor's bizarre behavior, mental health staff were contacted about his mental health conditions. Later that day, Mr. Taylor had a severe mental

health breakdown. He attempted to commit suicide by taking 46 pills that he had obtained from other inmates. He took the pills in front of Mr. LaReau, who then left him unattended while informing Sergeant Williams and Dr. LaMar about what had happened. Mr. LaReau returned said that he told Sergeant Williams that Mr. Taylor needed immediate medical attention due to a possible overdose and suicide attempt. Mr. LaReau then left Mr. Taylor unattended again. Sergeant Williams disregarded Mr. LaReau's directions and did not get Mr. Taylor medical attention for about two hours. Mr. Taylor told Sergeant Williams and Officer Campbell that he was suffering from severe abdominal pain, headache, slurred speech, and loss of vision, but they ignored him and left him unattended for about two hours. Only then was he sent to medical. Once Mr. Taylor made it to medical, he was not seen by medical staff and did not receive

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

TAYLOR v. REAGLE, (S.D. Ind. 2023).

TAYLOR v. REAGLE (TAYLOR v. REAGLE) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Helling v. McKinney
509 U.S. 25 (Supreme Court, 1993)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court, 2009)
Christopher Pyles v. Magid Fahim
771 F.3d 403 (Seventh Circuit, 2014)
Calvin Whiting v. Wexford Health Sources, Incorp
839 F.3d 658 (Seventh Circuit, 2016)
Daniel Schillinger v. Josh Kiley
954 F.3d 990 (Seventh Circuit, 2020)
Cesal v. Moats
851 F.3d 714 (Seventh Circuit, 2017)