An inmate who allegedly vomited “thick black blood” and had to be hospitalized may sue prison officials for failing to address his severe medical needs, a federal judge ruled earlier this month.

John Hibbs, who is incarcerated in Fremont Correctional Facility, reportedly collapsed in February 2019. He was then transported to the hospital for internal bleeding. After being discharged, medical personnel at the prison allegedly ignored Hibbs, refusing to abide by the follow-up measures the hospital recommended.

U.S. Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter strongly rebuked the government for suggesting Hibbs’ condition was not objectively serious and, therefore, not a violation of Hibbs’ constitutional rights.

“Defendants’ reading of the law suggests they believe FCF medical staff can knowingly ignore a doctor’s diagnosis and treatment plan – crafted after vomiting blood, losing consciousness, five days of hospitalization, and an esophageal clip – and continue to deny Mr. Hibbs any medical care until his condition becomes so severe that he again vomits blood,” Neureiter wrote in December.

Hibbs, who has been incarcerated at FCF since 2009, suffers from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes and chronic back pain. For the back pain, he has a prescription for Mobic, an anti-inflammatory drug. 

On Feb. 17, 2019, he allegedly felt dizzy, had chest pains and was vomiting blood. Rick Mercer, a nurse at FCF, told Hibbs he “would be fine” and sent Hibbs back to his cell without treating him. 

That night, Hibbs woke up and told his cellmate he felt as if he would pass out. Hibbs then allegedly vomited “thick black blood all over the wall, sink, and toilet.” His cellmate called security, who came as Hibbs passed out.

The prison transported Hibbs to the hospital, where staff diagnosed him with gastrointestinal tract bleeding. The cause was esophagitis, or inflammation of the esophagus, reportedly due to the Mobic that FCF staff prescribed him. Hibbs received a clip on his esophagus at the hospital and treatment through proton pump inhibitors, which reduce stomach acid.

Although doctors told Hibbs to return for a follow-up appointment and ordered continued treatment with proton pump inhibitors, Mercer and nurse Charisse Upshaw allegedly refused to care for Hibbs further at the facility.

“For over one year, Mr. Hibbs continued to seek treatment for those problems, but was continuously turned away from the FCF medical clinic by Defendants. To date, FCF has not allowed Mr. Hibbs to return the hospital for the follow up,” wrote Brent R. Owen, an attorney representing Hibbs.

Hibbs filed suit, alleging prison officials were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. Such claims fall under the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. He also alleged the FCF warden and other administrators were liable for failing to properly train and supervise medical staff.

In June of last year, the government moved to dismiss some of Hibbs’ claims. The government did not challenge Hibbs’ allegations against Mercer for failing to treat him in the lead-up to his hospitalization. Instead, the Colorado Attorney General’s Office claimed Mercer and Upshaw had not known about and ignored Hibbs’ serious medical needs after his discharge from the hospital.

“The only post-hospitalization symptom Hibbs claims to have experienced is ‘unnecessary abdominal pain,'” wrote Assistant Attorney General Gregory R. Bueno. “There is no discussion of what kind of care Hibbs requested, the reasoning he gave for why it was necessary, in what manner he requested this care, or any of the actual circumstances of the purported denials of these requests.”

Hibbs responded that Mercer and Upshaw knew he had been hospitalized, knew a doctor had prescribed follow-up treatment and knew he was continuing to experience pain. 

“For more than a month, they refused to give a man suffering from a serious medical condition their attention and assistance,” Owen wrote.

Neureiter, in analyzing the parties’ arguments, agreed Hibbs had plausibly stated a violation of his constitutional rights. Not only were Hibbs’ medical needs serious, but, as alleged, Mercer and Upshaw intentionally denied him treatment for his condition.

“Mr. Hibbs’ allegations are not one of a malingering inmate who has run of the mill digestive issues or heartburn after eating,” Neureiter wrote on Dec. 2. “Mr. Hibbs’ allegations do not leave Mercer and Upshaw clueless as to the alleged misconduct. His claim is clear: Mercer and Upshaw denied him appropriate medical care and prevented him from returning to the hospital for prescribed follow-up treatment.”

He recommended allowing the claims against the two nurses to proceed. No party objected to Neureiter’s analysis. On Jan. 5, U.S. District Court Judge Regina M. Rodriguez, who is presiding over the case, adopted Neureiter’s recommendation. She also agreed to dismiss Hibbs’ allegations of a failure to train and supervise, finding he did not offer sufficient allegations to back up that claim.

The case is Hibbs v. Mercer et al.