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.

Matthew Dietz v. County of Allegheny

August 30, 2011

MATTHEW DIETZ, PLAINTIFF,
v.
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Magistrate Judge Cathy Bissoon*fn1

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

I.MEMORANDUM

Pending before the Court is Defendants County of Allegheny, Ramon C. Rustin, and Shane Evans‟ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 40). For the reasons stated herein, the motion will be granted in part and denied in part.

BACKGROUND

A.Factual Background

Plaintiff Matthew Dietz brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act), the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and 42 U.S.C. § 12132 (Title II of the American With Disabilities Act) ("ADA"), alleging that Defendants Ramon C. Rustin, Shane Evans and Allegheny County violated Plaintiff‟s substantive due process rights and violated the ADA.*fn2

Plaintiff suffers from Type 1 Diabetes and uses a diabetes pump to administer a steady stream of Humalog, a fast-acting insulin, when needed. 2d. Am. Compl. ¶¶ 13-16 (Doc. 33). In March 2009, Plaintiff was arrested pursuant to an outstanding bench warrant and transferred to Allegheny County Jail. Id. at ¶¶ 17-21. During processing at Allegheny County Jail, a correctional officer refused to allow Plaintiff to keep his diabetes pump. Id. at ¶¶ 22-23. Plaintiff informed the corrections officer that Plaintiff needed either the pump or injections to control his blood sugar. Id. at ¶ 24. Plaintiff next was given a meal that was not specifically tailored to diabetic inmates. Id. at ¶ 26. Following the meal, Plaintiff repeatedly asked for insulin shots. Id. at ¶ 27. Plaintiff was lying on the ground in serious pain when he was making these requests. Id. at ¶ 28. Defendant Shane Evans told Plaintiff that he would be placed in the hole if he did not shut up. Id. at ¶ 29. Eventually,*fn3 Plaintiff received a shot of Humalog. Id. at

¶¶ 30-31. Plaintiff alleges the dose of Humalog was insufficient to treat his diabetes and, as a result, he began to suffer from severe ketoacidosis. Id. at ¶¶ 31, 36. Plaintiff was subsequently transferred to the medical ward where he was treated by Dr. Lucille Aiken,*fn4 an endocrinologist, who administered eight units of slow-acting insulin called Lantus. Id. at ¶¶ 37-40, 42. Dr. Aiken ignored Plaintiff‟s requests for fast-acting insulin, and he did not receive enough insulin. Id. at

¶¶ 41-42. Plaintiff lost twenty-five pounds during his "short stay" at the jail. Id. at ¶¶ 54. Plaintiff also alleges the lack of insulin during his Allegheny County Jail detention caused permanent nerve damage in his left hand. Id. at ¶ 56.

B.Procedural Background

Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 33) in response to an Order (Doc. 32) granting leave to file a Second Amended Complaint. Defendants County of Allegheny, Rustin, and Evans (collectively, "the County Defendants") filed a motion to dismiss (Doc. 40) the Second Amendment Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), asserting that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted with respect to both the § 1983 and ADA claims. Defendants Rustin and Evans further argue that the § 1983 claims against them should be dismissed on the basis of qualified immunity.

ANALYSIS

In deciding a motion to dismiss a complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the Court must accept as true all factual allegations in the complaint and draw all inferences from the facts alleged in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Phillips v. Cnty. of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 228 (3d Cir. 2008). To survive a motion to dismiss, the factual allegations in a complaint must "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. __, __, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic 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." Id. (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). The plaintiff must plead "enough facts to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence ...


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.