United States District Court, E.D. Oklahoma
ORDER AND OPINION 
HONORABLE RONALD A. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
action was originally filed in the District Court of
Pittsburg County, Oklahoma. It was removed to this court on
October 10, 2017. With leave to amend, Plaintiff filed two
amended complaints, on December 8, 2017 and on September 7,
2018. In his Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff added a
claim against McAlester Regional Health Center Authority
(“MRHC”) and Dr. Lee. Plaintiff brings a claim for
violation of the emergency medical transportation and active
labor act pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1395DD
(“EMTALA”). Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that
MRHC and Dr. Lee failed to ensure Plaintiff was stabilized
and transported to St. Francis. Plaintiff requests judgment
in his favor and damages in excess of $5, 000, 000.00. Now
before the court is the motion for summary judgment filed by
MRHC [Docket No. 128].
Standard of Review
court will grant summary judgment “if the movant shows
that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and
the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). The court’s function is not
“to weigh the evidence and determine the truth of the
matter but to determine whether there is a genuine issue for
trial.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477
U.S. 242, 249 (1986). In applying the summary judgment
standard, the court views the evidence and draws reasonable
inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the
nonmoving party. Burke v. Utah Transit Auth. & Local
382, 462 F.3d 1253, 1258 (10th Cir. 2006). At this
stage, however, Plaintiff may not rely on mere allegations,
but must have set forth, by affidavit or other evidence,
specific facts in support of the Complaint. Id.
allegations that are unsubstantiated do not create an issue
of fact and are insufficient to oppose summary
judgment.” Harvey Barnett, Inc. v. Shidler,
338 F.3d 1125, 1136 (10th Cir. 2003) (citation omitted).
A party asserting that a fact cannot be or is genuinely
disputed must support the assertion by: (A) citing to
particular parts of materials in the record, including
depositions, documents, electronically stored information,
affidavits or declarations, stipulations (including those
made for purposes of the motion only), admissions,
interrogatory answers, or other materials; or (B) showing
that the materials cited do not establish the absence or
presence of a genuine dispute, or that an adverse party
cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(1).
at the summary judgment stage evidence need not be submitted
in a form that would be admissible at trial, the substance of
the evidence must be admissible. For example, the court
disregards “inadmissible hearsay statements
contained in affidavits, as those statements could
not be presented at trial in any form.” Id.
(emphasis in original). “[A]ffidavits must be based
upon personal knowledge and set forth facts that would be
admissible in evidence; conclusory and self-serving
affidavits are not sufficient.” Hall v.
Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1111 (10th Cir. 1991).
Similarly, “[t]estimony which is grounded on
speculation does not suffice to create a genuine issue of
material fact to withstand summary judgment.” Bones
v. Honeywell Int’l, Inc., 366 F.3d 869,
876 (10th Cir. 2004). “To determine whether genuine
issues of material fact make a jury trial necessary, a court
necessarily may consider only the evidence that would be
available to the jury.” Argo, 452 F.3d at
Undisputed Material Facts 
has alleged an EMTALA claim against MRHC on the basis that
MRHC failed to stabilize Plaintiff’s emergency medical
condition before transferring him and failed to properly
transfer him to St. Francis Hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Discovery has concluded, and Plaintiff has not identified an
expert to specifically opine on EMTALA, whether MRHC
stabilized Plaintiff’s emergency medical condition
under EMTALA, whether MRHC properly transferred Plaintiff, or
whether any alleged EMTALA violations caused or contributed
to Plaintiff’s injury. MRHC filed its expert report on
May 10, 2019, identifying Dr. Barrett Bradt as its expert.
November 2016, Plaintiff was booked into the Pittsburg County
Jail (hereinafter “jail”). On the evening of
December 15, 2016, Plaintiff took a trazadone pill from
another inmate. He then developed an ischemic priapism, or a
prolonged erection, which is a known side-effect of
trazadone. Plaintiff was brought to MRHC’s emergency
department on the morning of December 19, 2016.
arrival at the MRHC emergency department, Plaintiff received
a medical screening examination, as well as a full medical
examination. As a result of the medical screening examination
and the full medical examination, MRHC determined that
Plaintiff had an emergency medical condition under EMTALA.
MRHC provided medical care and treatment, within the
hospital’s capacity, to Plaintiff, including (1)
consulting with a urologist at another facility, (2)
administering Terbutaline injections as outlined by the
consulting urologist, and (3) treating Plaintiff’s pain
associated with his condition.
Plaintiff was stabilized at MRHC, a doctor at St. Francis
Hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma was waiting for Plaintiff.
Docket No. 182-2 at 3. Dr. Lee testified that as
Plaintiff was stabilized, going to St. Francis in police
transport or private vehicle was not only acceptable, but
possibly more expeditious than going by ambulance.
expert Dr. Brandt opined that after the treatment at MRHC had
been performed, Plaintiff was “properly stabilized and
able to be transferred to the outlying facility where
additional urological intervention was available.”
Docket No. 128-5 at 2. Dr. Brandt noted that under
EMTALA, the term “stabilized” “means that
no material deterioration of the condition is likely, within
reasonable medical probability, to result from or occur
during the transfer of the patient from a facility” and
further opined that Plaintiff’s had been stabilized
under that definition “because no material
deterioration could occur due to the damage from the extended
priapism having already occurred.” Id ...