Simpson v. Orlando Health South Lake Hospital
6:25-cv-01129
M.D. Fla.Jun 25, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Civica Simpson, acting pro se, filed a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Orlando Health South Lake Hospital, Steven S. Bocas, and unnamed defendants regarding life support decisions for a patient in hospital ICU care.
- Simpson claims to have been the long-term caregiver for the patient, who was admitted for gastrointestinal distress, but subsequently suffered major medical events and is now unconscious and dependent on a ventilator.
- Hospital staff informed Simpson the patient's biological father (Bocas) directed removal of life support, which the hospital planned to execute imminently.
- Simpson asserts there is no valid legal authority for Bocas’s directive (e.g., no guardianship, health care surrogate, or advance directive identified), and claims the hospital’s actions violate the patient’s constitutional due process rights.
- Simpson sought an emergency temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent withdrawal of life support while the case is pending.
- The court assessed the TRO request on an expedited basis, without requiring a response from defendants since the plaintiff’s complaint had just been filed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether removing life support absent valid legal authority is "state action" violating § 1983 | Simpson: Hospital & staff act under state law/licensure, making actions state action. | Defendants: Private conduct, not state action. | Not state action; § 1983 claim not likely to succeed. |
| Entitlement to Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) | Simpson: Removal is imminent and irreparable; requests TRO to restrain action. | Not necessary to respond; focus on merits. | TRO denied—no substantial likelihood of success. |
Key Cases Cited
- Livadas v. Bradshaw, 512 U.S. 107 (U.S. 1994) (section 1983 requires deprivation under color of law for claim)
- Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sullivan, 526 U.S. 40 (U.S. 1999) (private conduct is not actionable under § 1983 even if wrongful)
- Willis v. University Health Services, Inc., 993 F.2d 837 (11th Cir. 1993) (sets out public function, state compulsion, and nexus/joint action tests for state action)
- Siegel v. LePore, 234 F.3d 1163 (11th Cir. 2000) (applicant must clearly establish all TRO elements)
- Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc., 299 F.3d 1242 (11th Cir. 2002) (lays out standard for preliminary injunction/TRO)
- Schiavo ex rel. Schindler v. Schiavo, 403 F.3d 1223 (11th Cir. 2005) (preliminary injunction in end-of-life dispute; specific statute enabled federal jurisdiction)