Febus v. CCS Correct Care Solutions

Background

Fortunato K. Febus, proceeding without a lawyer and without paying filing fees, sued Sorrell Feldman, M.D., under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Febus alleged that Feldman, a doctor at Orange County Correctional Facility, was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court had previously dismissed Febus’s claims against several other defendants.

Febus had been arrested on July 3, 2016, and treated at a hospital for injuries including four broken ribs. After he was transferred to Orange County Correctional Facility, he reported pain and later complained of pain in his groin. On October 28, 2016, Feldman diagnosed a reducible hernia that was not an emergency, prescribed pain medication, and referred Febus for an outside evaluation. The outside doctor also diagnosed a reducible hernia.

Feldman continued to examine Febus and monitor the hernia. In November 2016, he ordered an ultrasound and requested a surgical consultation. The ultrasound was unremarkable, and the surgical consultation was later cancelled subject to possible reevaluation. After Febus fell at the facility in May 2017, Feldman sent him for another outside evaluation. The outside doctor again found that the hernia was easily reducible, and a computed tomography scan of Febus’s abdomen was unremarkable. Febus was later transferred to other facilities, where elective hernia surgery was recommended and successfully performed on September 19, 2017.

Motion and Legal Standard

Feldman moved for summary judgment, which asks the court to rule without a trial when the record shows no genuine dispute about a fact that could affect the result and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law. Febus did not oppose the motion, despite receiving multiple extensions. The court nevertheless reviewed whether Feldman’s evidence supported summary judgment.

For a pretrial detainee’s deliberate-indifference claim involving medical care, the court required evidence that the medical condition or lack of care posed an unreasonable risk of serious harm and that the defendant recklessly failed to take reasonable steps despite knowing, or reasonably having to know, of an excessive health or safety risk.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that no reasonable jury could find that Feldman recklessly failed to provide reasonable medical care for Febus’s hernia. The record showed that Feldman examined the hernia repeatedly, diagnosed it as reducible and non-exigent, prescribed pain medication, arranged outside examinations, ordered an ultrasound, requested a surgical consultation, and continued monitoring the condition.

The court also emphasized that outside medical personnel repeatedly found the hernia reducible and did not state that it required emergency surgery. The later elective surgery, which occurred after Febus had left Orange County Correctional Facility, did not establish that emergency treatment had been required while he was there.

Disposition

The court granted Feldman’s motion for summary judgment. It instructed the clerk to terminate the motion and close the case. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.