Jeffrey Rowe v. Monica Gibson
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14573
| 7th Cir. | 2015Background
- Rowe, a Pendleton inmate, suffers GERD/esophagitis; prescribed Zantac (ranitidine) for about two years, then access was restricted.
- In January 2011, Rowe’s Zantac was limited to nurse-administered doses at 9:30 a.m. and 9:30 p.m.; meals were scheduled far from these times.
- Rowe could only obtain Zantac from the prison commissary if he paid for it, a capability he lacked due to cost.
- From July 2011, Rowe’s free Zantac prescription lapsed for ~33 days; requests for renewal were denied.
- Dr. Wolfe, a Corizon physician, initially refused then granted a renewal as a “courtesy,” later asserting timing didn’t matter for efficacy.
- Court reversed in part: Rowe’s claims regarding deliberate indifference based on timing and on the 33-day denial survived or were remanded for further fact-finding, with encouragement to appoint a neutral expert or counsel for Rowe.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Zantac dosing timing constitutes deliberate indifference | Rowe alleges inappropriate timing caused ongoing pain. | Wolfe asserts timing is immaterial for efficacy. | Summary judgment reversed; genuine dispute on timing. |
| Whether denial of free Zantac for 33 days constitutes deliberate indifference | Prolonged deprivation risks serious harm and pain. | Any lapse was not deliberate indifference; proper medical consideration. | Summary judgment reversed; deliberate indifference shown. |
| Whether retaliation claims survive against some defendants | Defendants threatened Rowe for filing suit. | Retaliation claims lack sufficient proof. | Retaliation claim survives against Wolfe/Bagienski; others dismissed. |
| Whether the district court should appoint counsel/neutral expert | Rowe needs counsel and expert testimony to prove medical indifference. | Appointment of counsel/experts is unwarranted. | Remand urged for counsel appointment and/or Rule 706 expert. |
Key Cases Cited
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994) (deliberate indifference standard under Eighth Amendment)
- Sain v. Wood, 512 F.3d 886 (7th Cir. 2008) (evidence of deliberate indifference in prison medical care)
- Miller v. Campanella, 794 F.3d 878 (7th Cir. 2015) (pain treatment adequacy standards in prisons)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (judicial gatekeeping of expert testimony)
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (2000) (summary judgment standards and evidence review)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (clear evidence standard for summary judgment)
- General Electric Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997) (basis of expert testimony and admissibility)
- Pyles v. Fahim, 771 F.3d 403 (7th Cir. 2014) (standard for evaluating medical-needs evidence on summary judgment)
- Pickett v. Sheridan Health Care Center, 664 F.3d 632 (7th Cir. 2011) (internet research by district court without party input)