Montalvo v. Lamy
139 F. Supp. 3d 597
| W.D.N.Y. | 2015Background
- Misael Montalvo, a diabetic former ECHC inmate, sued ECHC staff, Nurse Practitioners Sharon Galbo and Janet Collesano, several officers, Erie County, and Keefe Commissary alleging inadequate diabetic diet, denial of commissary purchases, false/retaliatory misbehavior reports, and due-process defects at a disciplinary hearing.
- He alleged repeated medical emergencies (blood sugar "bottoming out"), including near-unconsciousness, and that medical staff knew the diet was inadequate but failed to act.
- He claimed Deputy Brown issued a retaliatory misbehavior report after Montalvo filed grievances; he pleaded guilty to some charges and was found not guilty on others.
- He alleged denial of a Spanish interpreter and other procedural protections at a February 16, 2013 disciplinary hearing that resulted in 180 days in SHU.
- Procedurally, defendants moved to dismiss; plaintiff did not timely oppose. Court granted partial dismissal and allowed Eighth Amendment claims to proceed against Galbo and Collesano and Fourteenth Amendment due-process claims to proceed against Sgts. Usinski and Kuppel; all other claims/defendants were dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eighth Amendment — medical indifference re: diet | Montalvo: diet was medically inadequate for diabetes, caused emergencies and near-death; medical staff knew and failed to remedy | Defendants: no constitutional right to commissary; insufficient showing of culpable state of mind by staff | Allowed to proceed against Nurse Practitioners Galbo and Collesano for deliberate indifference; dismissed as to other individual ECHC staff for lack of personal involvement |
| Commissary access / ADA & Rehabilitation Act | Montalvo: exclusion from commissary food purchases discriminated on basis of disability | Defendants: no constitutional right to commissary; policy applies to all restricted diets; plaintiff failed to request or identify a reasonable accommodation | ADA/Rehab Act claims against Erie County and Keefe dismissed for failure to plead discrimination or reasonable accommodation |
| First Amendment — retaliation / grievance access | Montalvo: filed grievances; Deputy Brown filed false misbehavior reports in retaliation; Sgt. McAndrew refused to process grievance | Defendants: disciplinary records show Montalvo pled guilty to some charges; grievance coordinator properly returned grievances outside his authority | Retaliation and grievance-related First Amendment claims dismissed |
| Fourteenth Amendment — due process at disciplinary hearing | Montalvo: denied Spanish interpreter, witnesses, legal research, and impartial hearing, causing 180 days SHU (atypical hardship) | Defendants: procedures were adequate; no personal involvement by most defendants | Due-process claim survives as to Sgts. Usinski and Kuppel; dismissed as to other individuals |
| Municipal (Monell) and private actor liability (Keefe) | Montalvo: Erie County / Keefe liable for policies/customs causing violations | Defendants: Monell requires an underlying constitutional violation tied to municipal policy; Keefe is private and had no policymaking authority | Monell claim against Erie County dismissed; claims against Keefe Commissary dismissed for lack of allegations showing state action or policy responsibility |
| PLRA exhaustion | Montalvo: grievances filed; alleges threats and interference making remedies unavailable | Defendants: claim failure to exhaust administrative remedies | Court found defendants did not carry burden to show failure to exhaust; equitable exception for unavailable remedies (Hemphill) precludes dismissal at this stage |
Key Cases Cited
- Newman & Schwartz v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co., 102 F.3d 660 (2d Cir. 1996) (documents considered on Rule 12(b)(6)).
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. 2007) (plausibility standard for pleadings).
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (pleading standard and inference of defendant liability).
- Davis v. Goord, 320 F.3d 346 (2d Cir. 2003) (prison grievance filing is protected activity for First Amendment retaliation claims).
- Monell v. Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (U.S. 1978) (municipal liability requires policy or custom).
- Hemphill v. New York, 380 F.3d 680 (2d Cir. 2004) (defendant misconduct can render administrative remedies unavailable under PLRA).