PETTAWAY v. SMOCK et al, No. 1:2018cv00285 - Document 41 (W.D. Pa. 2020)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION re 34 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by SMOCK. Signed by Judge Susan Paradise Baxter on 05/26/2020. (esa)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
PETTAWAY v. SMOCK et al Doc. 41 Case 1:18-cv-00285-SPB Document 41 Filed 05/27/20 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA WAYNE PETTAWAY, Plaintiff, v. MS. SMOCK, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 18-285E Re: Motion for summary judgment ECF No. 34 MEMORANDUM OPINION 14 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) District Judge Susan Paradise Baxter 16 17 I. Introduction Plaintiff Wayne Pettaway, currently incarcerated within the State Correctional System of 18 19 Pennsylvania, presented this civil rights case against Healthcare Administrator Ms. Jeri Smock. 20 Plaintiff alleges that Ms. Smock denied and is continuing to deny him medical treatment for 21 Hepatitis C. ECF No. 7, page 2. As relief, Plaintiff seeks only medical “treatment as soon as 22 possible.” Id. at 3. Presently pending before this Court is a motion for summary judgment filed by 23 24 Defendant. ECF No. 34. Plaintiff opposes the motion. ECF No. 40. The motion is ripe for 25 disposition. 26 27 28 29 II. Standard of Review Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a) provides that summary judgment must be granted if the “movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:18-cv-00285-SPB Document 41 Filed 05/27/20 Page 2 of 3 30 entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” When applying this standard, the court must examine 31 the record and reasonable inferences from it in the light most favorable to the party opposing 32 summary judgment. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 33 (1986). 34 The moving party has the initial burden of proving to the district court the lack of 35 evidence supporting the non-moving party’s claims. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 330 36 (1986); Andreoli v. Gates, 482 F.3d 641, 647 (3d Cir. 2007). The burden then shifts to the non- 37 movant to come forward with specific facts showing a genuine issue for trial. Fed. R. Civ. P. 38 56(e). The non-moving party must go beyond the pleadings and show specific facts by affidavit 39 or by information in the filed documents (i.e., depositions, answers to interrogatories and 40 admissions) to meet his burden of proving elements essential to his claim. Celotex, 477 U.S. at 41 322. 42 43 44 III. Analysis and Discussion In support of the motion for summary judgment, the government has provided evidence 45 that Ms. Smock has no authority to grant Plaintiff the relief he seeks. As Health Care 46 Administrator at SCI Albion, Ms. Smock cannot prescribe or administer DAADs for inmates 47 with Hepatitis C. See ECF No. 37-4, Declaration of Jeri Smock, page 2. Plaintiff has provided no 48 evidence to the contrary as is his burden in the face of a well-supported motion for summary 49 judgment. In fact, Plaintiff’s Response, which is more a collection of letters or complaints to 50 prison staff than an opposition brief, supports the evidence provided by Defendant. One of the 51 documents is an Informal Request to Staff requesting medical treatment for Hepatitis C and the 2 Case 1:18-cv-00285-SPB Document 41 Filed 05/27/20 Page 3 of 3 52 Response from Clinical Director Dr. Robert Maxa indicates that all Hepatitis C treatment is 53 directed by Central Office and not by local medical departments. ECF No. 40-1, page 1. The motion for summary judgment will be granted in favor of Ms. Smock. Celotex, 477 54 55 U.S. at 322. An appropriate Order follows.1 56 The government has also provided evidence that since the filing of this action, the Settlement Agreement approved by a district court in the class action styled as Chimkent v. PADOC, (C.A. No. 15-3333 (E.D. Pa)) applies to Plaintiff. ECF No. 37-1, pages 1-29; ECF No. 37-2. The Settlement Agreement provides for a change in the treatment protocols for inmates with chronic Hepatitis C. Inmates are prioritized for treatment with DAADs based on the severity of their disease (fibrosis score) as measured by an APRI score and fibrosure test. ECF No. 37-1. Plaintiff has failed to point to any evidence to the contrary. 1 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
