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.

Martin Luther Rogers v. Umdnj

February 1, 2011

MARTIN LUTHER ROGERS,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
UMDNJ, ETC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jose L. Linares, U.S.D.J.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

OPINION

Plaintiff Martin Luther Rogers seeks to file a complaint in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This Court will grant in forma pauperis status. As required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), this Court has screened the Complaint for dismissal and, for the reasons set forth below, will dismiss the Complaint, without prejudice to the filing of an amended complaint if Plaintiff believes he can cure the deficiencies described in this Opinion.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff asserts violation of his Eighth Amendment rights by Dr. John Godinsky, Dr. John Hochberg, University of Medicine and Dentistry of the State of New Jersey ("UMDNJ"), University Behavioral Healthcare ("UBHC"), Correctional Healthcare, Correctional Medical Services ("CMS"), and various John Doe physicians. He asserts the following facts, which this Court is required to regard as true for the purposes of this review. See Stevenson v. Carroll, 495 F. 3d 62, 66 (3d Cir. 2007). Plaintiff alleges that he has been a state sentenced inmate in the New Jersey prison system since 2000, and that on April 24, 2008, he was transferred from East Jersey State Prison to Northern State Prison, where he is currently confined. Plaintiff further asserts that by contract CMS provided medical care to New Jersey inmates prior to September 30, 2008, and UMDNJ provided medical care by contract after that date. Plaintiff asserts that he suffers from the following medical conditions: neoplasm malignant bone marrow of the lumbar spine, mild levoscoliosis of thoracic spine, back disorder, dermatophytosis of the foot, obesity, and high cholesterol. He asserts the following facts:

18. On or around January 16, 2008, Plaintiff received an MRI of his lumbar spine at St Francis Medical Center in Trenton, NJ. The findings of the MRI suggested hyperplastic vertebral bone marrow, however; the findings were nonspecific and further assessments were suggested by the very same physicians of St Francis Medical Center.

19. On or around August 8, 2008, Plaintiff had a medical follow-up medical appointment with defendant John Hochberg, M.D., in NSP's infirmary where pain medications were again renewed.

20. On or around September 4, 2008, Plaintiff, again, had an appointment with defendant, John Hochberg, M.D., and pain medications were renewed.

21. On October 27, 2008, Plaintiff was admitted to the institutional infirmary for serious back pain. Plaintiff remained under the care of defendants UMDNJ, UHBC, John Hochberg, M.D., and other staff . . . until October 31, 2008; upon being discharged and placed back into the prison general population.

22. On or around November 5th and 11th of 2008, Plaintiff had doctor appointments with defendants John Hochberg, M.D., and John Godinsky, M.D., for medical treatment.

23. Despite recommendations by medical consultants concerning the care and treatment to Plaintiff's serious back condition, defendants, and each of them failed to follow-up on the assessment recommendation.

24. On December 2, 2008 through March 18, 2010, Plaintiff had several medical visits with defendants John Godinsky, M.D., and John Does #1-7 in NSP infirmary where pain medications were renewed and blood samples were extracted.

25. Despite recommendations by medical consultants concerning the necessary care and treatment to Plaintiff's back, his failed trial of physical therapy, and the findings of high cholesterol in Plaintiff's blood, defendants, and each of them, failed to provide adequate medical care and filed to treat Plaintiff's serious medical needs.

26. Defendants and each of them have been deliberately indifferent . . by: (1) failing to follow-up on the recommendations of medical consultants concerning care and treatment; (2) allowing medical prescriptions to lapse; (3) allowing medical orders, restricting housing and other medical necessities to lapse and; (4) failing to take action when ...


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.