Source: http://in.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180329_0000421.NIN.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 04:51:05+00:00

Document:
NOE J. MARANDET, M.D., and KIMBERLY MARAND MYERS, M.D., Defendants.
Donnell Robertson, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a complaint alleging he was denied medical treatment by two doctors at the Miami Correctional Facility. A filing by an unrepresented party “is to be liberally construed, and a pro se complaint, however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quotation marks and citations omitted). Nevertheless, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court must review the merits of a prisoner complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.
In 2016, Robertson was suffering from dizziness as a result of a head injury sustained in an automobile accident. As a result, he had medical orders requiring he be housed on the bottom range in a bottom bunk. ECF 1-1 at 1 and 11. Nevertheless, when he was moved on March 7, 2016, he was assigned to a top bunk. When Robertson questioned this assignment, a guard called both Dr. Marandet and Dr. Myers to inquire. Both doctors personally told the guard that Robertson did not have a medical pass for either a bottom range or bottom bunk. Early the next morning, around 3:00 a.m., Robertson became dizzy and blacked out while climbing out of his top bunk. As a result, he injured his head and back.
On July 20, 2017, Robertson saw a specialist who prescribed Prednisone and Ultram. However, both Dr. Marandet and Dr. Myers personally prevented either prescription from being ordered for 3 and a half weeks. As a result, they were not delivered until August 24, 2017, and Robertson experienced unnecessary pain.
For medical professionals to be held liable for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need, they must make a decision that represents “such a substantial departure from accepted professional judgment, practice, or standards, as to demonstrate that the person responsible actually did not base the decision on such a judgment.” Jackson v. Kotter, 541 F.3d 688, 697 (7th Cir. 2008). Here, Robertson alleges these defendants deliberately lied about his having a medical pass for a bottom bunk and that they intentionally prevented his prescriptions from being ordered. These allegations state a claim for violations of the Eighth Amendment.
Finally, Robertson alleges he “was never seen by any of the defendants.” ECF 1 at 12. He alleges this is in retaliation for his having filed a grievance on March 8, 2016, against Dr. Marandet and Dr. Myers. “To establish a First Amendment retaliation claim, the plaintiff must establish that he engaged in protected First Amendment activity, suffered a deprivation that would likely deter future First Amendment activity, and the First Amendment activity was a motivating factor in the defendant's decision to take the retaliatory action.” Walker v. Groot, 867 F.3d 799, 803 (7th Cir. 2017). Here, these allegations state a claim for retaliation.
Robertson is seeking both monetary damages and injunctive relief. However he is no longer housed at the Miami Correctional Facility. Therefore his injunctive relief claims are now moot. See Higgason v. Farley, 83 F.3d 807, 811 (7th Cir. 1996) and Jones v. Butler, 663 F. App'x 468, 470 (7th Cir. 2016).

References: v. 
 § 1915
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.