County wants summary judgment in inmate’s lawsuit
By Janice Gregorson
An attorney representing Olmsted County says that a former jail inmate was given proper medical care and that a federal lawsuit claiming the jail disregarded the inmate’s serious medical needs should be dismissed.
Attorney Gregory Griffiths of Rochester has requested summary judgment in the lawsuit, which was filed against the county two years ago by Phillip David Schaub, a paraplegic, who was sentenced to serve six months in jail in 2003 for second-degree criminal sexual conduct.
He alleges he had special housing and medical needs that were not adequately addressed and that he suffered potentially life-threatening medical consequences.
The motion for summary judgment was filed in U.S. District Court on Tuesday by Griffiths on behalf of Olmsted County, Sheriff Steve Von Wald and detention staff named as defendants.
Griffiths said the jail is handicapped accessible and has handicapped accessible cells and showers, including ones occupied by Schaub.
The motion details what was done by staff to accommodate Schaub’s medical needs, such as allowing him to bring in additional mattresses and pillows and to go to his mother’s home for lunch and to bathe while on work-release. Griffiths said Schaub was seen several times by nurses and a doctor during the eight days he was in the main housing unit in July 2003.
On July 24, 2003, the doctor determined Schaub needed to be taken to the hospital for treatment of a developing pressure sore. The doctor said she did not believe the jail could continue to provide Schaub with the care he needed at that time. Griffiths said that that same day, Olmsted District Judge Jodi Williamson ordered Schaub released from the jail until his medical issues were resolved. Four days later, the judge vacated the remainder of Schaub’s sentence.
"The efforts described demonstrate there was constant, continuing care provided" to Schaub, Griffiths wrote. "No one ignored his condition. There was no delay in treatment. "
No response has been filed yet to the county’s motion.
A hearing on the motion is set for March 20.