IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No.
ALVARO HERNANDEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS, LLC;
CORRECTIONAL HEALTHCARE COMPANIES, LLC. d/b/a “CORRECTIONAL
HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, INC.”;
NURSE KIMBERLY SPANGRUDE, FNP-C, in her individual capacity;
NURSE LISA CULVER-BARRIENTOS, in her individual capacity;
NURSE DANIELLE RECCHIA, in her individual capacity;
NURSE CATHERINE MORIN, LPN, in her individual capacity;
UNK Health Services Administrator for CORRECTIONAL HEALTHCARE COMPAINES, in
his/her individual capacity;
Defendants.
COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff Alvaro Hernandez, by and through counsel, personally complains against the
Defendants and requests a trial by jury as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. This is an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to recover damages for violation
of federally protected rights. Plaintiff seeks damages for the negligent and deliberately indifferent
medical care he received while housed at the Montrose County Detention Center (“MCDC”) in
Montrose, Colorado. Despite Mr. Hernandez’s clearly documented injuries to his head and his right eye,
agents of MCDC failed to adequately and appropriately respond to Mr. Hernandez’s serious medical
needs. Because of these failures, Mr. Hernandez has permanent vision loss in his right eye.
-1-
2. Mr. Hernandez was a pre-trial detainee who was housed at the MCDC September
12th of 2016 through March 1st of 2017, where he suffered from a head injury.
3. Medical staff at MCDC were consciously aware of Mr. Hernandez’s serious
medical condition. The substantial delay in addressing Mr. Hernandez’s serious medical condition
was the direct result of the permanent loss of vision in his right eye.
4. Defendants’ conduct, under color of state law, proximately caused the deprivation
of Mr. Hernandez’s federally protected rights.
JURISDICTION, VENUE and NOTICE
5. This action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States and is being
brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1988.
6. Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343 and
2201.
7. Venue is proper in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). All alleged events and omissions occurred in the State of Colorado
where Defendants maintain offices and/or reside.
8. Supplemental pendent jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1367 because violations
of federal law alleged are substantial and the pendent causes of actions derive from a common
nucleus of operative facts.
9. The state law claims in this matter are brought against a private corporation and
-2-
agents thereof, therefore no notice of claims was required to them under the Colorado
Governmental Immunity Act.
PARTIES
Plaintiff:
10. The Plaintiff, Alvaro Hernandez, (hereinafter referred to as “Mr. Hernandez”) is a
natural person.
11. At all times hereto, Mr. Hernandez was and is a Citizen of the State of Colorado, a
state within the United States of America.
12. Mr. Hernandez currently resides at 301 S. 2nd St. #52, Gunnison, CO 81230.
Defendants:
Correctional Healthcare Companies and related Defendants
13. Defendant Correct Care Solutions, LLC ("CCS") is a Kansas corporation doing
business in the State of Colorado, with its principal street address located at 1283 Murfreesboro
Road, Suite 500, Nashville, TN 37217. Its registered agent of service in Colorado is located at
3773 Cherry Creek North Drive #575, Denver, CO 80209. On information and belief, this
company contracts with Montrose County to provide medical services to inmates and detainees at
Montrose County Detention Facility and supervises and implements such care.
14. Defendant Correctional Healthcare Companies, LLC., d/b/a Correctional
Healthcare Management, Inc., is a Delaware corporation doing business in the State of Colorado,
-3-
with its principal street address located at 1283 Murfreesboro Road, Suite 500, Nashville, TN
37217. Its registered agent of service in Colorado is located at 3773 Cherry Creek North Drive
#575, Denver, CO 80209. On information and belief this company contracts with Montrose County
to provide medical services to inmates and detainees at the Montrose County Detention Facility
and supervises and implements such care.
15. Defendant Correct Care Solutions, LLC and Defendant Correctional Healthcare
Companies, LLC. d/b/a Correctional Healthcare Management, Inc. are collectively referred to as
"CHC Defendants."
16. CHC Defendants are proper entities to be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for their
deliberately indifferent policies, practices, habits, customs, procedures, training, and supervision
of staff, including individual Defendants, with respect to the provision of medical care and
treatment for inmates with serious medical needs.
17. At all relevant times, the CHC Defendants were acting under color of state law and
performing a central function of the State of Colorado thus making them liable under § 1983.
18. CHC Defendants are sued directly and indirectly for negligent supervision,
negligent training of their staff, for failing to ensure the provision of appropriate care in the
treatment of Mr. Hernandez, for the acts and omissions of their agents and/or employees, and for
the herein described acts by their involved employees, agents, staff, and affiliates, who were acting
within the scope and course of their employment.
-4-
19. At all times, relevant to the claims against him/her, Defendant Nurse Kimberly
Spangrude, was and is a citizen of the United States and a resident of and domiciled in the State
of Colorado. Defendant Nurse Kimberly Spangrude was an employee of CHC Defendants and
acted under the color of state law. Defendant Nurse Kimberly Spangrude is sued in her individual
capacity.
20. At all times, relevant to the claims against him/her, Defendant Nurse Lisa Culver-
Barrientos, was and is a citizen of the United States and a resident of and domiciled in the State of
Colorado. Defendant Nurse Lisa Culver-Barrientos was an employee of CHC Defendants and
acted under the color of state law. Defendant Nurse Lisa Culver-Barrientos is sued in her individual
capacity.
21. At all times, relevant to the claims against him/her, Defendant Nurse Danielle
Recchia, was and is a citizen of the United States and a resident of and domiciled in the State of
Colorado. Defendant Nurse Danielle Recchia was an employee of CHC Defendants and acted
under the color of state law. Defendant Nurse Danielle Recchia is sued in her individual capacity.
22. At all times, relevant to the claims against him/her, Defendant Nurse Catherine
Morin, was and is a citizen of the United States and a resident of and domiciled in the State of
Colorado. Defendant Nurse Catherine Morin was an employee of CHC Defendants and acted
under the color of state law. Defendant Nurse Catherine Morin is sued in her individual capacity.
23. At all times, relevant to the claims against him/her, Defendant UNK Health
Services Administrator, was and is a citizen of the United States and a resident of and domiciled
in the State of Colorado. Defendant UNK Health Services Administrator was/is an employee of
-5-
CHC Defendants and acted under the color of state law. Defendant UNK Health Services
Administrator is sued in his/her individual capacity.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
24. Mr. Hernandez incorporates each paragraph of the Complaint as if fully restated
therein.
25. On September 12, 2016, Alvaro Hernandez suffered a traumatic brain injury.
26. Mr. Hernandez was admitted to the Montrose Memorial Hospital on September 12,
2016.
27. Mr. Hernandez was in custody at the time he was admitted to the Montrose
Memorial Hospital on September 12, 2016.
28. On September 12, 2016, Mr. Hernandez was booked into the MCDF after medical
clearance by Montrose Memorial Hospital.
29. On September 17, 2016, Mr. Hernandez returned to the Montrose Memorial
Hospital and was diagnosed with corneal abrasion, and a subconjunctival hemorrhage (broken
blood vessel) of the right eye.
30. On September 17, 2016, Mr. Hernandez was advised to follow up with a healthcare
provider if not better.
31. On September 18, 2016, Mr. Hernandez was seen by a medical provider, believed
to be Defendant Nurse Catherine Morin, in custody in response to continued complaints of blurred
vision in his eye.
-6-
32. On September 20, 2016, Nurse Defendant Kimberly Spangrude noted Mr.
Hernandez had head pain and was prescribed ibuprofen and an ice pack.
33. On September 20, 2016, Nurse Spangrude noted Mr. Hernandez continued to
complain of pain in head, dizziness, vomiting, and bloodshot right eye.
34. On November 1, 2016, Nurse Spangrude noted no resolution of redness of right
eye, blurred vision, and constant tearing.
35. On November 1, 2016, Nurse Spangrude noted that right eye was red, conjunctiva
infected, sclera infected and that while antibiotics had been used “as instructed,” “we considered
possibility of irritation to eye…so we stopped them for one week but no change.”
36. Nurse Spangrude further noted right eye injury-chronic and that the eye was tearing
copiously.
37. On November 3, 2016, Nurse Spangrude arranged a visit to the San Juan Eye Center
for November 4, 2016.
38. On November 4, 2016, Mr. Hernandez was seen at the San Juan Eye Center for
“eye irritation” where patient complained of gradual vision loss beginning one week after the
initial injury of September 12, 2016.
39. On November 4, 2016, Dr. Jared Hadlock examined Mr. Hernandez noting a dense
cataract but normal retina.
40. On November 4, 2016, Mr. Hernandez was diagnosed by Dr. Jared Hadlock with a
traumatic cataract of the right eye and referred for cataract surgery.
41. Dr. Hadlock’s referral for cataract surgery appears on a CHC Defendant form
commonly used at the MCDF.
-7-
42. On November 15, 2016, Mr. Hernandez indicated further discomfort in the right
eye, pain, swelling, and blurred vision.
43. On November 15, 2016, Mr. Hernandez was diagnosed with a hyper mature cataract
with angle closure and intraocular pressure of the right eye.
44. On November 17, 2016, Mr. Hernandez was seen by Dr. Michael Waggoner of
ICON Eye Care, who prescribed him with multiple medications intended to relieve pressure within
the eye.
45. On November 17, 2016, a scan of Mr. Hernandez’s right eye indicated an absence
of retinal detachment or hemorrhage.
46. On November 18, 2016, Nurse Defendant, Danielle Recchia, noted that they had
received a call from Dr. Waggoner’s office, who highly suggested that Mr. Hernandez be seen by
a retinal specialist as soon as possible.
47. On November 21, 2016, Dr. Waggoner advised that Mr. Hernandez was at risk for
permanent optic nerve damage and blindness and would require surgery for glaucoma.
48. On November 29, 2016, CHC Defendant Nurse Kimberly Spangrude noted that Mr.
Hernandez continued to have a large cataract on his right eye and was being treated for acute closed
angle glaucoma.
49. On November 29, 2016, Nurse Spangrude advised that they would not be making
a referral to a specialist for cataract surgery and that Mr. Hernandez would need to follow up (when
released) with a primary care provider.
-8-
50. Upon information and belief, the final decision to decline to refer Mr. Hernandez
to a specialist was made by an Unknown Health Services Administrator employed by CHC
Defendant.
51. On November 30, 2016, Dr. Fox continued to treat Mr. Hernandez’s closed angle
glaucoma and advised that Mr. Hernandez likely had permanent optic damage.
52. On January 5, 2017, Mr. Hernandez was seen by Dr. James Fox for existing
glaucoma. Mr. Hernandez complained of continued pain from temple to back of his head and
continued lack of vision in his right eye.
53. On January 5, 2017, Dr. Fox noted the possibility of a detached retina in the right
eye around the sublaxed cataract.
54. On January 5, 2017, Dr. Fox noted that the angular glaucoma was resolved as was
a papillary blockage. Dr. Fox referred Mr. Hernandez to Dr. Waterhouse at the Retina Center for
a retinal evaluation.
55. On January 24, 2017, a CHC Defendant “referral request” form indicated “possible
retinal detachment” and that Mr. Hernandez was financially liable for these services.
56. On January 24, 2017, Mr. Hernandez was diagnosed with a “giant retinal tear” in
the right eye along with an absolute cataract.
57. On January 27, 2017, Mr. Hernandez was seen by Dr. Waterhouse from the Retina
Center, who confirmed the detached retina and traumatic cataract and ordered surgery to be
scheduled.
58. On February 22, 2017, Dr. Waterhouse conducted a surgery to re-attach the retina.
-9-
59. On March 14, 2017, Dr. Waterhouse saw Mr. Hernandez and noted extremely
limited vision (hand motions only) in right eye.
60. On April 3, 2017, Dr. Waterhouse again saw Mr. Hernandez and noted no
additional improvement in vision in the right eye.
61. But for the informal, unwritten custom and practice of deliberate indifference to
inmates’ serious medical needs that was established by the CHC Defendants and their failure to
adequately train employees in meeting the serious medical needs of inmates, Mr. Hernandez would
not have been subjected, in the form of failure to provide him medical attention, to a deprivation
of his constitutional rights. This deprivation was a natural and foreseeable consequence of the
CHC Defendants’ acts and omissions.
62. The intentional actions or inactions of each individual Defendant as described
herein deprived Mr. Hernandez of due process and of rights, privileges, liberties, and immunities
secured by the Constitution of the United States of America.
63. As a direct and proximate result of each individual Defendants’ actions, Mr.
Hernandez’s constitutional rights were violated and have suffered damages entitling him to
compensatory damages against the Defendants. Mr. Hernandez is also entitled to punitive damages
against all Defendants to redress their willful, malicious, wanton and reckless conduct in violation
of his civil rights.
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
42 U.S.C. § 1983-Fourteenth Amendment Violation
Deliberate Indifference to Serious Medical Needs
(Against all Defendants)
- 10 -
64. Plaintiff incorporates each paragraph of the Complaint as if restated fully therein.
65. At all times, relevant to the allegations in this Complaint, Defendants acted under
the color of state law.
66. Mr. Hernandez was and is a citizen of Colorado and all the individual Defendants
are persons under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
67. Mr. Hernandez had a clearly established right under the Fourteenth Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution to be free from deliberate indifference to his known serious medical needs.
68. Each CHC Defendant knew or should have known of this clearly established right
at the time of Mr. Hernandez’s intake and classification at MCDC.
69. All Defendants were aware that Mr. Hernandez had been diagnosed with a
traumatic cataract on or about November 4, 2016.
70. At all times, relevant to the allegations in this Complaint, each individual all
Defendants knew of and disregarded the substantial risks associated with Mr. Hernandez’s serious
medical condition.
71. Nonetheless, with deliberate indifference to Mr. Hernandez’s constitutional right to
adequate medical and mental health care, as provided by Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment to the United States Constitution, Defendants knowingly failed to examine, treat,
and/or care for Mr. Hernandez’s serious medical condition.
72. When Mr. Hernandez alerted the individual Defendants to his need for medical
treatment, each Defendant ignored and/or unnecessarily delayed proper medical treatment despite
Mr. Hernandez’s obvious serious medical needs.
- 11 -
73. All the deliberately indifferent acts of each individual Defendant were performed
within the scope of their official duties and employment.
74. The acts or omissions of each individual Defendant were the legal and proximate
cause of Mr. Hernandez’s on-going pain, anxiety and loss of vision in his right eye.
SECONDCLAIM FOR RELIEF
Medical Negligence
(Against Corporate CHC Defendants and individual Nurse CHC Defendants)
75. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set
forth herein.
76. CHC Defendants are private corporations that contract to provide medical care and
health services to inmates at MCDC or agents of such private corporations where conduct as
described herein was engaged in within the scope of their agency.
77. Defendant Nurse Kimberly Spangrude, FNP-C is a private individual, and not a
public official or employee.
78. Defendant Nurse Lisa Culver-Barrientos is a private individual, and not a public
official or employee.
79. Defendant Nurse Danielle Recchia is a private individual, and not a public official
or employee.
80. Defendant Nurse Catherine Morin, LPN is a private individual, and not a public
official or employee.
- 12 -
81. CHC Defendants, Defendants Nurse Kimberly Spangrude, Nurse Lisa Culver-
Barrientos, Nurse Danielle Recchia, and Nurse Catherine Morin are not entitled to immunity under
the CGIA or otherwise.
82. At all times relevant hereto, Alvaro Hernandez was under the care and treatment of
the CHC Defendants’ staff, including Nurse Defendants, through its contractual relationship with
Montrose County.
83. CHC Corporate Defendant is vicariously liable for the negligent acts and omissions
by its agents and/or employees including those individually named herein, and directly liable for
their own negligent failures in training, policies, and practices.
84. Defendants had a duty to provide reasonable medical care and treatment to inmates
at the MCDC, including Mr. Hernandez, and to exercise reasonable care in the training and
supervision of their employees.
85. These duties are informed by state law. Under C.R.S. 16-3-40, “prisoners arrested
or in custody shall be treated humanely, and provided with adequate food, shelter, and, if required,
medical treatment.” The provision of medical treatment and humane care is a statutory obligation
under this and other statutes. These duties are also informed by NCCHC standards.
86. Agents and employees of the CHC Defendants, while acting within the scope of
their employment, vicariously committed negligent acts and omissions set forth herein with respect
to the care and treatment of Mr. Hernandez.
87. UNK Nurse had a nurse-patient relationship with Mr. Hernandez and was acting or
failing to act within the scope of her employment with CHC Defendants at all times pertinent to
this Complaint.
- 13 -
88. UNK Nurse had a nurse-patient relationship with Mr. Hernandez and was acting or
failing to act within the scope of her employment with CHC Defendants at all times pertinent to
this Complaint.
89. Other caregivers at MCDC involved in the negligent treatment of Mr. Hernandez
were acting within the scope of their employment with CHC related Defendants.
90. Involved caregivers at MCDC including Kimberly Spangrude, Lisa Culver-
Barrientos, Catherine Morin, and Danielle Recchia, and others named in the Statement of Facts,
owed Mr. Hernandez a duty to exercise that degree of care, skill, caution, diligence and foresight
exercised by and expected of medical providers in similar situations.
91. Each Nurse Defendant at MCDC consciously disregarded a substantial and
unjustifiable risk that they knew or should have known would cause further complications and
permanent damage/vision loss in Mr. Hernandez’s right eye.
92. A certificate of review was completed regarding this claim prior to the filing of this
complaint.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court enter judgment in his favor against the
Defendants, jointly and severally, and grant:
a) Appropriate relief at law and equity;
b) Compensatory and consequential damages, including damages for emotional
distress, cost of health care provided, humiliation, and other pain and suffering
on all claims allowed by law in an amount to be determined at trial;
c) Attorney’s fees and costs of this action, including expert witness fees on all
claims allowed by law;
- 14 -
d) Punitive damages as to the Defendants to redress their willful, malicious,
wanton and reckless conduct in violation of Plaintiff’s civil rights;
e) Pre-and post-judgment interest at the lawful rate; and
f) Any further relief that this Court deems just and proper, and any other relief as
allowed by law.
PLAINTIFF REQUESTS A JURY TRIAL ON ALL MATTERS SO TRIABLE.
Dated this 1st day of October 2018.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/Daniel R. Shaffer
Daniel R. Shaffer, No.35661
405 Ridges Blvd., Suite B
Grand Junction, CO 81507
Phone: (970) 243-2552
Fax: (970) 243-3905
[email protected]
Attorney for Plaintiff
Alvaro Hernandez
- 15 -
