Kapa v. Palakovich, 1:09-cv-00371

Background

Plaintiff is administrator of Joseph Kapa, Jr.’s estate, suing multiple defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged Eighth/Fourteenth Amendment deliberate indifference to medical needs.
Kapa was incarcerated at SCI-Smithfield, with a long history of psychiatric treatment and past suicidality, including multiple episodes in the psychiatric observation cell (POC).
On June 25, 2007,. Kapa died by suicide in the SCI-Smithfield RHU after being placed in the POC and then RHU; there were contemporaneous complaints about medications and care.
Defendants include Commonwealth Defendants (Palakovich, Weaver, Nasrallah, Kuhns, Greenleaf, Smeal) and private MHM and doctor Bauer, with disputes over supervision, medical decision-making, and policy implementation.
The court addresses whether each defendant acted with deliberate indifference by evaluating (1) Kapa’s vulnerability to suicide, (2) defendants’ knowledge of that vulnerability, and (3) recklessness/indifference in response.
The court grants summary judgment to several defendants, denies it as to Kuhns and Greenleaf, and dismisses Smeal as moot; Medical Defendants’ motion is granted in full.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Commonwealth Defendants were deliberately indifferent to Kapa’s suicide risk	Kapa’s vulnerability was known; delays/denials in mental health responses show recklessness.	Commonwealth officials responded to grievances; medical decisions rested with clinicians; no deliberate indifference.	No genuine issue; Palakovich/Weaver/Nasrallah granted summary judgment
Whether Kuhns and Greenleaf were aware of and disregarded Kapa’s suicide risk	Inmates reported threats; Kuhns/Greenleaf allegedly dismissed concerns.	No clear evidence of direct knowledge or disregard; disputed conversations and observations create factual questions.	Summary judgment denied as to Kuhns and Greenleaf
Whether Dr. Bauer’s psychiatric care violated the Eighth Amendment	Bauer repeatedly treated, adjusted, and monitored Kapa; treatment gaps contributed to suicide risk.	Bauer treated Kapa over years; last treatment occurred six months before suicide; not reckless indifference.	Dr. Bauer - granted summary judgment for Medical Defendants
Whether MHM’s policy/custom caused a constitutional deprivation	MHM policy ignores suicidality and permits release from POC despite risk.	MHM trained staff and provided treatment; no evidence of an official policy causing deprivation.	MHM summary judgment granted
Whether the record supports a Monell-type claim against MHM or Commonwealth defendants	Custom/policy evidence exists through repeated handling of suicidal inmates and grievances.	Records show no policy or custom causing deliberate indifference; professional disagreement on care is not policy.	No Monell/L82-type liability established; as to MHM, no policy; partially resolved with other holdings

Key Cases Cited

Colburn v. Upper Darby Twp., 946 F.2d 1017 (3d Cir. 1991) (three-prong test for deliberate indifference to suicide risk)
Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (U.S. 1994) (actual knowledge of substantial risk required for liability)
Spruill v. Gillis, 372 F.3d 218 (3d Cir. 2004) (medical malpractice or mere disagreement not actionable under Eighth Amendment)
Lazaro v. Monmouth Cnty. Corr. Inst. Inmates, 834 F.2d 326 (3d Cir. 1987) (medical treatment standards in Eighth Amendment context)
Saldana v. Kmart Corp., 260 F.3d 228 (3d Cir. 2001) (summary judgment standards and burden shifting)