Lawsuit Against City Over Lack of Pretrial Medical Treatment Can Proceed
A federal judge has ruled that a lawsuit filed by a woman who broke her wrist during a car accident and was later arrested can sue the city for the permanent disfigurement of her wrist due to an alleged lack of appropriate medical care.
January 09, 2018 at 05:31 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge has ruled that a lawsuit filed by a woman who broke her wrist during a car accident and was later arrested can sue the city for the permanent disfigurement of her wrist due to an alleged lack of appropriate medical care.
U.S. District Judge Gerald A. McHugh of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied the city of Philadelphia and Dr. Jonathan Cohen's motions for dismissal of plaintiff Aimee Davis' complaint. Davis claimed that she was locked up for six weeks before receiving surgery for her broken wrist, and by that time it had healed incorrectly, despite an initial hospital recommendation that she receive immediate treatment.
McHugh held that Davis provided plausible claims that the city and Cohen violated her 14th Amendment right to due process, arguing that the inadequate medical care was a form of punishment meted out before her innocence or guilt was established. Davis alleged that she was deprived of treatment at Riverside Correctional Facility because the city wanted to save money.
“Plaintiff makes detailed factual allegations supporting her claim that she was deprived of her 14th Amendment right. She alleges that, despite explicit hospital instructions and her own, repeated requests to Riverside staff, she went without urgently needed surgery, endured severe pain, and now has a permanently injured wrist as a result,” McHugh said. “She attributes this to inadequate intake procedures at Riverside that fail to ensure time-sensitive medical information is relayed by transport police to front-line medical staff, and from front-line staff to an appropriate medical staffer with power to act on it. These alleged practices are not rationally related to the city's otherwise legitimate goal of cost savings, because deprivation of required medical care would be unconstitutionally 'excessive in relation' to that goal.”
McHugh also said that Davis' inadequate intake documentation used by the city, which she alleged led to her shoddy treatment, could amount to an affirmative policy, making the city responsible for a 14th Amendment violation.
Davis also claimed that Cohen ignored her requests to see a specialist and actually delayed her treatment.
“I am not persuaded by Dr. Cohen's response: that he 'exercised his medical judgment and treated plaintiff by ordering an X-ray and referring her for an orthopedic evaluation,'” McHugh said. “This fails to address plaintiff's claim of delay. At their core, her allegations pertain to timeliness—that when Dr. Cohen finally responded to her request for surgery by ordering a consult, it was too late. Regarding the allegedly inaccurate and incomplete transfer summary, Dr. Cohen simply counters that he 'completed the required summary paperwork.' To the extent that this raises a factual dispute, I must take plaintiff's version of the facts as true.”
Davis' attorney, Sue Ayres of Hill & Associates, did not respond to a request for comment. Jonathan Cooper with the City Law Department's civil rights unit did not respond to a request for comment. Cohen's lawyer, Christopher A. Iacono of Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, did not respond to a request for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJCPenney Customer's Slip-and-Fall From Bodily Substance Suit Best Left for a Jury to Decide, Judge Rules
4 minute readPeople in the News—Jan. 9, 2025—Rawle & Henderson, Armstrong Teasdale
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 16-48. It’s Comp Time Again: How To Crush Your Comp Memo
- 2'Religious Discrimination'?: 4th Circuit Revives Challenge to Employer Vaccine Mandate
- 3Fight Over Amicus-Funding Disclosure Surfaces in Google Play Appeal
- 4The Power of Student Prior Knowledge in Legal Education
- 5Chicago Cubs' IP Claim to Continue Against Wrigley View Rooftop, Judge Rules
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250