James Neisler Complaint

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 14-CV-1250

JAMES NEISLER

Plaintiff,

v.

CORRECTIONAL HEALTHCARE COMPANIES, INC. d/b/a CORRECTIONAL
HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, INC.;
CHC COMPANIES, INC.;
RON WAITS, individually;

Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________

CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT WITH REQUEST FOR TRIAL BY JURY AND
CERTIFICATE OF REVIEW
______________________________________________________________________________

Plaintiff James Neisler, by and through his attorneys, HOLLAND, HOLLAND EDWARDS &
GROSSMAN, P.C., complains against Defendants and requests a trial by jury as follows:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. This is an action brought by James Neisler, a 47-year-old man, to vindicate
serious deprivations of his constitutional and state law rights.
2. Plaintiff Neisler was treated with reckless deliberate indifference and negligence
by medical personnel at the Arapahoe County Jail and Detention Facility (hereinafter Arapahoe
Jail).
3. Mr. Neisler, who has diabetes and suffers from peripheral neuropathy, was
required to wear ill-fitting work boots and work on his feet past his work restrictions, causing a
wound to his foot. In a willfully and wantonly malicious manner, this wound was then allowed
Case 1:14-cv-01250 Document 1 Filed 05/01/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 22

2
to open and become increasingly infected, swollen and painful until it finally turned black,
requiring amputations of all of his toes on his right foot.
4. Ron Waits, NP and CHC Defendants were deliberately indifferent and negligent
to Mr. Neislers serious medical needs, evidenced by their multiple conscious refusals to act and
utter abandonment of this man in medical crisis for a month, including but not limited to; not
following their own medically ordered instructions regarding the special diabetic needs of this
inmate; not developing any care plan for this chronic care and special needs patient; recklessly
failing to develop a wound care plan for his known serious foot wound; persisting in requiring
Mr. Neisler to wear the ill fitting boots despite known open sores; not assessing and treating his
known serious foot wound; their deliberately indifferent refusal to let him see a doctor in a
timely fashion; and their decision to not secure necessary medical attention or timely transfer
him out of the facility, as was needed and required.
5. Mr. Neisler begged for help for over a month before he finally was transferred to
the Emergency Room. By then it was too late.
6. As a result of these deliberately indifferent and negligent actions, Mr. Neisler has
lost all of the toes on his right foot.
7. The full extent of his disabilities and damages are not yet known. Mr. Neisler has been
told that he may have continuing bone infection as a result of the foregoing deliberate
indifference and negligence and that he may require further amputation.
8. He also suffered significant and lasting emotional distress and ongoing physical
disabilities.
II. JURISDICTION, VENUE, AND NOTICE

3
9. This action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, including
Article III, Section 1 of the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 42 U.S.C.
1988. The Jurisdiction of this Court is further invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1343,
2201.
10. This case is instituted in the United States District Court for the District of
Colorado pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 as the judicial district in which all relevant events and
omissions occurred and in which Defendants maintain offices and/or reside.
11. Supplemental pendent jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. 1367 because the
violations of federal law alleged are substantial and the pendent causes of action derive from a
common nucleus of operative facts.
12. The state law claims in this matter are brought against private corporations and
therefore no notice of claims was required under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act.
However, such notice was timely given.
III. PARTIES
11. Plaintiff James Neisler is a resident of the State of Colorado and a citizen of the
United States of America.
12. Plaintiff resides in Littleton, Colorado.
13. Defendant Correctional Healthcare Companies, Inc., d/b/a Correctional
Healthcare Management, Inc., is a private Delaware corporation with its principal street address
and registered agent of service located at 6200 S. Syracuse Way, Suite 440, Greenwood Village,
CO 80111.
14. Defendant CHC Companies, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal

4
street address and registered agent of service located at 6200 S. Syracuse Way, Suite 440,
Greenwood Village, CO 80111.
15. Defendant Correctional Healthcare Companies, Inc., d/b/a Correctional
Healthcare Management, Inc., and Defendant CHC Companies, Inc. are herein after collectively
referred to as the CHC Defendants.
16. CHC Defendants are sued for negligence by their staff, negligent supervision,
negligent training of their staff, for failing to ensure the provision of appropriate care in the
treatment of Mr. Neisler and 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, all while
acting within the scope and course of their employment.
17. CHC Defendants are private corporations, not entitled to any immunity under the
Colorado Governmental Immunity Act.
18. CHC Defendants would also be proper entities to be sued under 42 U.S.C. 1983
for deliberately indifferent policies, practices, habits, customs, procedures, training and
supervision of staff, including of individual Defendant, with respect to the provision of medical
care and treatment for inmates with wound infections and serious emergency medical needs.
Plaintiff gives notice that he anticipates amending his complaint following discovery to add a
claim under 42 U.S.C. 1983 for entity liability against these companies.
19. Plaintiff also gives notice that he anticipates amending his complaint following
discovery to add a claim against Arapahoe County, through its Board of County Commissioners
and Sheriff, for its own deliberate indifference and that of its delegated final decision makers and
related to its non delegable duty to provide constitutionally sufficient medical care.

5
20. On information and belief, Defendant Ron Waits, NP is a resident of Colorado
and a citizen of the United States of America, and an employee of CHC Defendants.
IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS
21. Mr. Neisler was incarcerated around June 17, 2013 in Arapahoe Jail.
22. Mr. Neisler is a diabetic. He has kept his diabetes under control through exercise,
athletic activity, and staying healthy.
23. As a result of his diabetes, however, he has neuropathy in his feet and cannot feel
his toes well.
24. Before entering jail, Plaintiff had never been required to undergo any amputations
and carefully monitored his diabetes.
25. He had no sores or ulcers upon entering the jail.
26. Nurse Practitioner Ron Waits saw Mr. Neisler on about July 8, 2013, for issues
relating to his diabetes.
27. At that time, Mr. Neisler expressed concerns about the fact that his ankles were
swollen. He stated that he was afraid to climb to the second bunk in his cell because he was
unable to feel the steel wrungs due to his peripheral neuropathy.
28. NP Waits ordered that Mr. Neisler be given a bottom bunk.
29. NP Waits also ordered that Mr. Neislers standing requirements be restricted to no
more than two hours at a time.
30. Contrary to these well-known and documented medically ordered work
restrictions, on or about July 20, 2013, Mr. Neisler was required to work in the warehouse,
standing and wear ill-fitting steel toed boots for over four hours, lifting 50 pounds sacks of food.

6
31. Proper footwear is very important and medically necessary to ulcer prevention for
diabetic patients like Mr. Neisler.
32. Wounds can develop in a short time from undue pressure on the feet of diabetics.
33. Around the two hour mark of working, Mr. Neisler informed the crew leader that
he was not supposed to stand more than two hours at a time due to his diabetes and asked to be
relieved. He was nevertheless required to work for two more hours.
34. At the end of this shift, Mr. Neisler had a blister on his right toe.
35. Knowing that a blister on the foot of a diabetic constitutes a medical emergency,
Mr. Neisler immediatley sought medical attention.
36. On July 20, 2013, Mr. Neisler sent a KITE, stating that being required to work
against restrictions caused him to develop a blister on his right toe, reporting: my right foot is
severely swollen and right toe is double its normal size.
37. In this July 20, 2013 KITE, Mr. Neisler requested immediate medical attention.
38. At 7:15 am on July 21, 2013, V. Ginter, LPN notes that, 1 day ago Mr.
Neislers boot rubbed a blister on his big toe and now it is open. This area is measured at
2cm by 1cm and described as red, tender and open.
39. LPN Ginter also noted on July 21 that the protocol for a skin infection should
begin.
40. Open sores on a foot are a well-known medical emergency for diabetic patients.
Without immediate, consistent, effective, continuing and timely medical attention, there is a high
risk of infection and amputation.
41. On July 23, 2013, Mr. Neisler sent another KITE stating I would like to see a

7
medical doctor about extreme swelling and blisters on my right big toe.
42. On July 23, 2013, the next care note is made, stating [w]ound care done to L
[sic] great toe. No change in wound status.
43. On July 25, 2013, NP Waits charted that Mr. Neisler developed a sore due to the
inappropriate boots he was required to wear, and charted in objective findings that his sore was
open red, swollen, and painful.
44. NP Waits charted Great big toe cellulitis.
45. It is well known by nurse practitioners that a diabetic with a foot wound like this
must be off loaded and wear diabetic shoes. To the extent antibiotics are given, the wound must
be cultured.
46. It is further well known among nurse practitioners that failure to do so is
associated with a high risk of amputation.
47. NP Waits did nothing meaningful in response to this known serious medical need
of an open, red, and swollen wound on the foot of a diabetic.
48. As a result, Plaintiffs sore grew worse.
49. Mr. Neisler requested to see a doctor and receive proper wound care on numerous
occasions during the months of July and August.
50. Mr. Neisler was told he would see the MD but instead saw NP Waits, who is
routinely referred to as the doctor despite not having a medical degree.
51. Instead of helping this man in a medical crisis, Arapahoe and CHC staff
abandoned him, refusing to provide any effective wound care or obtain medical treatment.
52. On July 30, 2013, Mr. Neisler sent another KITE about his toe and foot being

8
very swollen and bleeding from 2 areas where blisters have torn open. He stated, Im very
scared as I am a diabetic and I would like to see the doctor.
53. On July 31, 2013, Mr. Neisler is again described as having wound care
perfomed and LPN Elaine Washam reports that he was [p]laced on line to see Ron NP.
54. Despite the known presence of wounds, and the importance of preventing them
from reaching the bone and causing osteomyelitis, staff never made an appropriate wound care
plan to treat the ulcers which started on July 20, 2013.
55. Mr. Neisler again saw NP Waits on August 1, 2013. NP Waits charted that Mr.
Neisler had a 2.0 blood blister on plantar surface, Great toe cellulitis, and swelling.
56. During this visit, NP Waits ordered an X-ray of Mr. Neislers big toe for next
week.
57. On August 7, 2013, Mr. Neisler wrote another KITE, requesting that the ordered
X-ray take place.
58. On August 11, 2013, Mr. Neisler stated in another KITE that: I have now been
waiting for over 11 days for an xray on my right foot which the doctor requested for me. This is
my 2
nd
follow up as to why no xray yet. . . my foot is still very swollen.
59. On August 12, 2013, still not having an Xray or proper medical attention, Mr.
Neisler sent another KITE, stating my right big toe is bleeding, oozing and twice the size of
my left big toe. My right foot and ankle are severely swollen I am diabetic and very
concerned about losing my big toe.
60. Again, no medical intervention or medical care was sought or provided. LPNs
responded to these KITES that an X-ray had been scheduled.

9
61. Plaintiffs repeated reasonable requests for proper timely medical care were
instead recklessly denied.
62. After charting their conscious awareness of this medical emergency, their
awareness that his sores were caused by the ill-fitting jail shoes, and Mr. Neislers repeated pleas
and requests for medical attention for these sores, CHC staff refused to take the steps known to
be necessary to prevent the worsening of these sores or provide any timely treatment.
63. One of the most elemental treatment requirements for a diabetic with a foot
wound is off weighting. Mr. Waits medical orders in this regard required only that Mr. Neisler
not stand for more than two hours, even after this ulcer developed. Mr. Waits did not order that
he have a job without the boots or that he be offloaded.
64. Thus, even after this dangerous ulcer was known to have occurred and growing
worse, Mr. Neisler kept working in job positions that required standing in boots.
65. It was negligent and reckless for NP Waits not to order that Mr. Neisler had a
work restriction that he could not work in jobs requiring boots after the blister appeared, and to
not order that he be off weighted.
66. As a predictable result, Mr. Neisler developed additional ulcers on his other toes.
67. Mr. Neisler objected that he had open sores on his foot, telling medical and jail
staff that he clearly could not wear the boots.
68. On August 13, 2013, almost three weeks after this blister was first brought to
medical attention, an LPN charted: Pt developing another blister on his 3
rd
toe. Pt states from
boots. I called crew leader and asked he be placed in job where he will not need to wear boots.
69. In response to this Order, Mr. Neisler was assigned to the bakery, a job that

10
required standing for more than 2 hours. He sent another KITE saying why in the world would
I be assigned back to the kitchen when my foot is significantly worse now than in July. It is now
bleeding on 2 different toes and I am getting it xrayed tomorrow? The xray was ordered 2 weeks
ago when I last saw the doctor.
70. On August 14, 2013, Mr. Neisler sent another KITE, demonstrating his mounting
desperation for help, stating: my toe is literally rotting now and smells awful Im begging
to be taken to a hospital or wound care clinic for it to be looked at. . . please take me.
71. That same day, on August 14, 2013, over three weeks after this wound started,
Della Schmidt, LPN notes that pt c/o smelling bad with cell mates complaining. Pt kiting to be
sent out for debredement [sic]. Placed on Doctors line.
72. Mr. Neisler received an x-ray, finally, on August 14, which showed considerable
soft tissue swelling but no osteomyelitis visible.
73. NP Waits charted on around August 15, 2013, that Mr. Neislers right toe ulcer
was 2.5 x 2.5 cm, had necrotic tissue and presented with malodor.
74. NP Waits told Mr. Neisler that his medical condition was outside the scope of
what they handle at the jail.
75. NP Waits referred Mr. Neisler to the wound care clinic for debridement and
wound management.
76. NP Waits recklessly did not mark this transfer as emergent, despite knowing
that Mr. Neisler had actual dead tissue on his feet that had been festering for three + weeks and
was beyond the scope of his practice or that of anyone at the jail.
77. NP Waits charted that the need for this transfer to the wound care clinic was

11
urgent, but did nothing to ensure that this known serious medical need was met. Instead, NP
Waits recklessly abandoned Mr. Neisler in a medical crisis, and Mr. Neisler was not transferred
for necessary treatment.
78. On August 16, 2013, Mr. Neisler sent another KITE stating that NP Waits had
told him he would be transferred to deal with necrotic tissue, asking when that was going to
happen. Mr. Neisler specifically stated that NP Waits told him that: there was necrotic tissue
that needed to be cut off and he would order a trip to a medical clinic or hospital for me. When
am I going? He pled: My foot is getting worse hour by hour and I really really dont want to
lose my big toe ... or any other toes ... I am a diabetic and am very scared at this point.
79. On August 17, 2013, Plaintiff received a response telling him to please be
patient and that the MD will have our medical clerk make your appt. On information and
belief, when the term MD is used in these records, it is referring to NP Waits.
80. Nothing was done in response to this known medical crisis except to callously tell
Mr. Neisler that he needed to be patient about his foot that was rotting off.
81. Apparently as of August 17, the appointment hadnt even been made.
82. Mr. Neisler responded stating: I appreciate the fact that I may have an
appointment set, however it has been 3 days since the visit with the doctor and I have a bloody
sock collection growing bigger by the hour. Im bleeding through the bandage as soon as I put it
on and take a few steps. It is getting worse every minute and I feel that Im going to lose my big
toe, if not my foot do you understand that I am diabetic with complete neuropathy of my feet
and lower legs?
83. Despite these multiple KITEs, and medical staff charting over and over again that

12
he had a diabetic wound that was infected and growing in size, and that Mr. Neisler was
reporting such things like I really really dont want to lose my big toe, that he was very scared
and was desperate to see a doctor, CHC staff consciously decided to ignore Plaintiffs repeated
pleas for medical attention.
84. On August 18, 2013, NP Waits saw Mr. Neisler. Even though 72 hours since his
Order for transfer had elapsed and Mr. Neisler was still in the jail with his rotting toe, NP Waits
still did not have Mr. Neisler emergently sent out or take any steps to arrange for his transfer.
85. On August 18, 2013, Mr. Niesler wrote another KITE begging to be taken to a
wound clinic for care, as Mr. Wait said he was ordering. That was 5 days ago. He notes that he
was actually seen by NP Waits on the 18
th
, but still, apparently nothing was done.
86. On August 19, 2013, it is noted that the right toe continues with soft swelling
pink to red. With odor bandaid drainage brown in color.
87. Also on August 19, 2013, Mr. Neisler sent a KITE stating that his foot was
bleeding profusely. He asked again when he was going to be sent out stating:
I spoke with deputy McCutcheon today at 11:40 am about my foot which is
bleeding profusely. He spoke with the pod 5 nurse who said as far as she can tell,
there is not an order from my last meeting with Mr. Wait for an an [sic]
appointment for outside medical care. Mr. Wait told me at my appointment last
week that he was absolutely 100 percent sending me out because my injury, in his
words was out of the scope of what he could do and needed to be taken care of
immediately. He said the tissue had become necrotic and needed to be cut away.

88. Three hours later, Mr. Neisler received another response from HSA Meyer,
simply repeating in response to this begging for help: We are awaiting word back from the
hospital so they can tell us when to bring you. The ball is in their court now; but, I just asked my
clerk to call them again and bug them ... The nurse will see you tonight to reevaluate the dressing

13
needs.
89. On August 20, 2013, Della Schmidt, LPN now notes that pt seen and dressing
change done to r great toe pt has brownish discharge to bandaid, blister with necrotic tissue
opened up.
90. Mr. Neisler sent another KITE on August 20, 2013, stating I am now going on 6
days since Dr. Wait put in my medical visit to a hospital. My foot is rotting and stinking away. I
have never heard of waiting for a hospital to tell you when you can come. Normally people go to
the hospital when they need care.
91. HSA Meyer responded, stating that, apparently according to Arapahoe County
and/or CHC policy, this did not qualify as an emergency.
92. HSA Meyer, acting apparently on NP Waits designation of this situation as
urgent rather than emergent, even after the 72 hours had elapsed, stated that according to
CHC and/or Arapahoe policy: [h]ere, we have to request an appointment, a consultation, and
they tell us when to bring patients. This is not an emergency visit it is a specialty clinic visit . .
. Unfortunately, we are still awaiting the date from the hospital.
93. Mr. Neisler then sent another KITE: well almost another 24 hours has gone
by. Any word from the hopsital yet? Im exasperated.
94. On August 21, 2013 Cozy Ross, LPN, states that she was approached at am med
pass by I/M with concern about care for his great toe. Toe was black with thick flap of skin
separated from toe on underside of toe. Smell was moderate & toe was mod swollen with some
redness. This pt reports he was supposed to have an outside appt with medical personelle but has
not yet rec.

14
95. After over a month of begging medical staff for help, the HSA finally intervened
and secured transfer to a hospital.
96. Thus, on August 21, 2013, HSA Meyer charted: concerned about the patients
medial condition and the delay in setting up a clinic/specalist appointment, contacted DHMC
CCMF in an attempt to secure a direct-admit for care.
97. Mr. Neisler was finally taken to the emergency room where his toe was
amputated.
98. By the time he was admitted to Denver Health the infection had spread to his
bone and he has required serial amputations of his toes trying to cut off the infection,
culminating to date in the amputation of all toes on his right foot.
99. On August 22, 2013, Denver Health records state:
The patient is a well controlled diabetic male who has a rather large ulceration on
the plantar aspect of his right toe encompassing approximately ! of the tuft of the
great toe. It is down to the bone in multiple areas. There are sinuses. There is
malodor. It has been present for approximately 30 days. There is streaking and
erythema extending proximally as well. MRI did indicate a focus of osteomyelitis
in the middle aspect of the distal phalanx. . .it was noted that there was almost no
viable tissue plantarly, it was very necrotic and malodorous, and it did probe to
bone in numerous areas, and, in order to have soft tissue closure and to have an
adequate debridement, it was deemed necessary to do a partial toe amputation.

100. Denver Health records describe his diabetic ulcer as: ulcer + malodor + necrotic,
exposed bone ... likely osteomyeltis.
101. After the procedures at Denver Health, Mr. Neisler came back to Arapahoe
County where his conditions remained unsanitary and reckless in the face of his known medical
condition. He kited repeatedly about these problems as well.
102. He was on IV antibiotics, which were inappropriately administered on at least one

15
occasion. Even his plastic cover for his foot wrap was taken away. He was supposed to use this
to shower, when he protested that it was ordered by Denver Health doctors, a nurse told him:
you are in jail now, this is not the hospital.
103. Mr. Neisler was released by the Court early release based on medical necessity
and need for care that was not being provide on September 22, 2013. After his release, Mr.
Neisler had to have serial operations resulting in, to date, the amputation of all toes on his right
foot.
104. Mr. Neislers injury is not yet fully ascertained. He is still receiving treatment
and evaluation related to these events and may still need further amputations. All of these
amputations are related and caused by the reckless mismanagement of his initial ulcer.
105. The emotional trauma of watching his body deteriorate while medical
professionals did nothing to save his foot haunts Mr. Neisler. He suffers permanent physical
disabilities and impairments, ongoing pain and persisting emotional distress.
106. As a direct and proximate result of the wrongful conduct of the Defendants,
Plaintiff has been substantially injured. These injuries include, but are not limited to, loss of
constitutional rights, physical injuries, impairments and disfigurement, great pain and emotional
distress, anxiety, shock, sadness, depression, anger, stress, and special damages for medically
related treatment caused by the unconstitutional, and negligent conduct of these Defendants.
107. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff also has suffered lost wages. He is
currently not able to work. He has applied for and received jobs since leaving jail but has had to
quit those jobs because his foot needed additional attention, amputations and required him to be
non-weight bearing. His economic losses in this regard are not yet fully ascertained, but will

16
include lost wages, special economic costs, medical liens, and the like.
108. Mr. Neisler also suffers emotional distress as a result of these events, including
their ongoing sequelae, including humiliation, anguish, and embarrassment over his physical
deformity and its cause. These injuries have significantly impacted his relationship with his
children.
109. Mr. Neisler is a life long athlete. Skiing, hiking, tennis, basketball, running, rock
climbing were all activities he participated in regularly with his children. These methods of
physical activity also helped him keep his diabetes in check. Mr. Neisler has been told he cannot
participate in any of these activities as the risk of a blister and further amputation was too high.
110. Defendant Waits conduct was engaged in with malice or with reckless
indifference to the federally protected rights of Plaintiff, entitling him to punitive damages.
111. Plaintiff hereby gives notice that he anticipates seeking leave to amend his
complaint to add punitive damages on his state law claims upon the completion of substantial
discovery.
V. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983
Eighth Amendment Prohibition Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment
(Plaintiff against NP Waits)

112. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set
forth herein.
113. 42 U.S.C. 1983 provides that:
Every person, who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or
usage of any state or territory or the District of Columbia subjects or causes to be

17
subjected any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction
thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the
constitution and law shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in
equity, or other appropriate proceeding for redress . . .

114. Plaintiff is a citizen of the United States and all of the Defendants to this claim are
persons for purposes of 42 U.S.C. 1983.
115. Plaintiff had a clearly established right under the Eighth Amendment to be free
from deliberate indifference to his known serious medical needs.
116. Individual Defendant to this claim, at all times relevant hereto, was acting under
the color of state law.
117. Individual Defendant continued to act in bad faith and with deliberate indifference
to Plaintiffs serious medical needs and constitutional rights when he willfully ignored his
repeated requests for medical attention and intentionally denied and/or delayed his access to
medical care. Individual Defendant also, with deliberate indifference, did not enter a medical
order disallowing the use of ill-fitting boots for Plaintiff, did not make or implement an
appropriate wound care plan, and decided not to transfer him emergently outside of the facility.
118. Individual Defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity.
119. The acts or omissions of Defendant as described herein intentionally deprived
Plaintiff of his constitutional rights and were moving forces and substantial significant
contributing proximate causes of Plaintiffs injuries.
120. As a direct result of Defendants unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has suffered injuries,
damages and losses as described herein entitling him to compensatory and special damages
including attorneys fees in amounts to be determined at trial.

18
121. As a further result of the Defendants unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has incurred
significant special damages, including medically related expenses and will continue to incur
further medically related expenses in amounts to be established at trial.
122. Plaintiff has also suffered lost wages, in ongoing amounts to be ascertained in
trial.
123. Plaintiff is further entitled to attorneys fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
1988, pre-judgment interest and costs as allowable by federal law.
124. Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages against this individually named Defendant
under 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the actions of these individual Defendants have been taken
maliciously, willfully or with a reckless or wanton disregard of the constitutional rights of
Plaintiff.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Negligence
(Plaintiff against entity CHC Defendants)
125. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set
forth herein.
126. CHC Defendants are private corporations that contract to provide medical care
and health services to inmates at Arapahoe Jail.
127. Defendants to this claim are properly sued for state law negligence as they are
private corporations and therefore are not entitled to immunity under the Colorado Governmental
Immunity Act.
128. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff Neisler was under the care and treatment of
the CHC Defendants staff through their contractual relationship with Arapahoe County.

19
129. The CHC Defendants are vicariously liable for the negligent acts and omissions
by its agents and/or employees including those named individually herein, and directly liable for
their own negligent failures in training, policies, and practices.
130. Defendants had a duty to provide reasonable medical care and treatment to
inmates at Arapahoe County, including Mr. Neisler, and to exercise reasonable care in the
training and supervision of their employees.
131. These duties of care are informed by state law. Under C.R.S. 16-3-401,
prisoners arrested or in custody shall be treated humanely and provided with adequate food,
shelter, and, if required, medical treatment. The provision of adequate medical treatment and
humane care is a statutory obligation under this and other statutes. These duties are also
informed by NCCHC standards.
132. Employees of the CHC Defendants, while acting within the scope of their
employment, variously committed negligent acts and omissions as set forth herein with respect to
the care and treatment of Plaintiff Neisler.
133. All medical care givers, including but not limited to NP Waits, had caregiver-
patient relationships with Plaintiff and were acting or failing to act within the scope of their
employment with CHC Defendants at all times pertinent to this Complaint.
134. Involved caregivers at the jail, owed Mr. Neisler a duty to exercise that degree of
care, skill, caution, diligence and foresight exercised by and expected of nurses, nurse
practitioners, and other care givers in similar situations.
135. Involved caregivers at the jail, grossly deviated from that standard of care and
were negligent in failing to properly care for and treat Plaintiff Neislers known serious medical

20
needs in the health care services they failed to provide. Inter alia, they further breached that
duty of care in negligently failing to properly assess Mr. Neisler, negligently charting his
symptoms and complaints, failing to respond to his multiple requests for medical care despite
knowing and charting that his wound was worsening and becoming necrotic, failing to
appropriately treat the known worsening diabetic ulcer, unduly delaying the order for Plaintiff
not to work prolonged periods standing in ill-fitting assigned boots; and refusing to take him to
the doctor or hospital while he was begging for help and telling them that his foot was rotting off
for weeks.
136. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants unlawful conduct, Plaintiff
Neisler suffered significant physical pain, emotional suffering, permanent disability, and other
damages.
137. Plaintiff Neisler is therefore entitled to general and compensatory damages for
such pain and suffering and emotional distress and to special damages for past and future
medical and health care related expenses, all in amounts to be proven at trial.
138. Mr. Neisler has also suffered lost past and future earnings in ongoing amounts to
be ascertained in trial.
139. Although not required, Plaintiff hereby gives notice that he may be seeking to
amend the complaint to add punitive damages against these Defendants because the injuries
complained of are attended by circumstances of fraud, malice or willful and wanton conduct
engaged in by their employees and agents.


21
VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff prays that this Court enter judgment for the Plaintiff and against each of the
Defendants and enter the following relief:
1. Award Plaintiff compensatory, non economic, consequential and economic damages
as proven at trial against all of the Defendants;
2. Award Plaintiff special damages as proven at trial;
3. Award Plaintiff punitive damages relating to the federal claim brought in this matter
against Individual Defendant;
4. Award Plaintiff punitive damages relating to the state law claim should Plaintiff file
suitable amendment of the complaint;
5. Award Plaintiff attorneys fees and costs as provided for under all applicable federal
and state statutes;
6. Award Plaintiff interest from the earliest possible date under appropriate federal and
state statutes;
7. All other appropriate relief at law and equity.
PLAINTIFF RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS A JURY TRIAL ON ALL TRIABLE ISSUES.
/s/ Anna Holland Edwards
Anna Holland Edwards
Erica T. Grossman
John R. Holland
HOLLAND, HOLLAND EDWARDS & GROSSMAN, PC
1437 High Street
Denver, CO 80218


22
CERTIFICATE OF REVIEW

This is to certify that undersigned counsel has conferred, pursuant to Colorado statutes,
with a person who has extensive expertise in the areas of alleged negligence and deliberate
indifference to serious medical needs and that this professional has reviewed the known facts,
including such records, documents, and other materials as he has found to be relevant to the
complaint allegations of negligent acts and omissions, and has concluded that the filing of these
claims do not lack substantial justification and in fact are substantially meritorious and involve
clear violations of the standards of care involved.
/s/ Anna Holland Edwards
Anna Holland Edwards
Case 1:14-cv-01250 Document 1-1 Filed 05/01/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
AO 440 (Rev. 12/09) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
for the
__________ District of __________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff
v. Civil Action No.
Defendant
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendants name and address)
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) or 60 days if you
are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney,
whose name and address are:
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
CLERK OF COURT
Date:
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
District of Colorado
JAMES NEISLER
14-CV-1250
Correctional Healthcare Companies, Inc., CHC
Companies, Inc., et al
Correctional Healthcare Companies, Inc.;
CHC Companies, Inc,;
Ron Waits
6200 S. Syracuse Way, Suite 440
Greenwood Village, CO 80111
Anna Holland Edwards, Esq.
Erica Grossman, Esq.
John Robert Holland, Esq.
1437 High Street
Denver, CO 80218
AO 440 (Rev. 12/09) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
Civil Action No.
PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)
was received by me on (date) .
I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)
on (date) ; or
I left the summons at the individuals residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individuals last known address; or
I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is
designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)
on (date) ; or
I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or
Other (specify):
.
My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:
Servers signature
Printed name and title
Servers address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
14-CV-1250
0.00
Print Save As... Reset

James Neisler Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

James Neisler Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

You might also like