Wheeler v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15067
| 7th Cir. | 2012Background
- Wheeler, a prisoner, alleged in Sept. 2011 that prison officials and Wexford Health Sources denied effective care for golf-ball–size hemorrhoids, causing excruciating pain.
- The district court screened complaints sua sponte to weed out frivolous claims, but Wheeler's claim reportedly was not promptly screened under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).
- Wheeler sought preliminary relief and appointment of counsel and medical expert; the district court did not act on these motions.
- Wheeler filed a third injunction motion; the district court later denied relief, stating lack of irreparable harm, similarity to pending claims, and avoidance of prison administration.
- On appeal Wheeler challenged the district court’s delay in screening and denial of injunctive relief; the Seventh Circuit granted relief on review, vacating the order and remanding for prompt screening.
- The opinion directs the district court to authorize service on treating defendants, allow responsive briefing on the injunction, and conduct an evidentiary hearing, with possible recruitment of counsel for Wheeler.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of §1915A screening | Wheeler alleges delay violated mandatory screening. | District court properly deferred pending review. | Screening must be completed promptly; district court erred. |
| Need for irreparable harm in injunction | Irreparable harm exists due to ongoing severe pain. | Delay does not show irreparable harm. | Irreparable harm can exist; delay cannot justify denying meritorious relief. |
| Effect of delay on injunctive relief standards | Delay by court justifies expedited relief. | Delay is not a basis to deny relief. | Judges must act promptly; delay cannot foreclose relief. |
| Joinder and number of defendants in complaint | Too many defendants and claims may be severed. | Joinder allowed; risk of frivolous claims. | Court should sever or dismiss extra defendants to streamline screening. |
| Remedy on appeal | Prompt screening and relief are required. | Lower court decisions should stand absent error. | Order vacated and remanded with instructions to proceed as described. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sampson v. Murray, 439 F.3d 61 (4th Cir. 1974) (irreparable harm as a factor in injunctions)
- Winter v. NRDC, 555 U.S. 7 (U.S. 2008) (established injunction standards material to irreparable harm)
- Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647 (7th Cir. 2007) (en banc discussion on appointment of counsel for injunctive relief)
- Lee v. Cook County, 635 F.3d 969 (7th Cir. 2011) (severance or dismissal to manage joinder issues)
- George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605 (7th Cir. 2007) (joinder limits under Rule 18 & 20)