Green v. Henry et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
HOT SPRINGS DIVISION
DAVID HASKELL GREEN 	PLAINTIFF
v. 	Civil No. 6:24-cv-06135-SOH-MEF
DR. GUY HENRY;
RN SHIRLEY CHAMPON
(Director of Nursing);
RN DARRELL BASSHAM
(H.S.A. Rep.) 	DEFENDANTS
MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This is a civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was directly assigned
to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to General Order 2024-02, but not all parties to the
action have consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Accordingly,
the case will automatically be reassigned to United States District Judge Susan O. Hickey and
referred to the undersigned for a report and recommendation pursuant to the provisions of 28
U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1) and (3). Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s ability to pursue this case in
this District in light of the Wellpath LLC Bankruptcy Plan in In re Wellpath Holdings, Inc., No.
24-90533 (Bankr. S.D. Tx.).
I. 	BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed his Complaint on October 21, 2024. (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff raises a denial
of medical care claim while he was incarcerated in the Arkansas Division of Correction (ADC)
Ouachita River Unit. (Id.). He further alleges that all named Defendants refused to provide their
names to him for a month because he filed a medical grievance. 	(Id.). 	The Defendants are all
employees of Wellpath LLC, the company contracted to provide medical care to the ADC.
On November 20, 2024, in numerous cases in this District, Wellpath LLC filed a Notice of
Bankruptcy and a copy of the Amended Interim Order Enforcing the Automatic Stay entered by
Case 6:24-cv-06135-SOH Document 13 Filed 11/19/25 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
the Honorable Alfredo R. Perez, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Southern District of
Texas, Houston Division, on November 12, 2024. 	The bankruptcy case number is 24-90533
(ARP). In the Interim Order, the Stay was extended to Non-Debtor Defendants. Accordingly, this
Court entered an Order directing that this case be stayed and administratively terminated prior to
preservice screening. On February 24, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Lift the Automatic Stay.
(ECF No. 10). As grounds, he argues that the bankruptcy filing was made in bad faith by Wellpath
as a legal maneuver to avoid litigation. (Id. at 1). He notes that the bankruptcy was filed only 14
days after he filed his lawsuit in this District. (Id.).
In May of 2025, Wellpath LLC filed Status Reports in the stayed cases in this District,
explaining that the Bankruptcy Court had confirmed the Plan of Reorganization (“Plan”) as of May
9, 2025, and that the previously ordered litigation stay had been lifted. 	See In re Wellpath
Holdings, Inc., No. 24-90533 (Bankr. S.D. Tx. May 1, 2025) (ECF No. 2,596). 	They further
explained that the Plan permanently enjoins Plaintiff from commencing or continuing any action
against WellPath, LLC, and that Plaintiff must opt-out of the third-party releases in the Plan with
respect to his individual capacity claims against Wellpath employees to proceed with those claims
in this case.
The Court subsequently ordered that the litigation stay in this case be lifted on October 28,
2025. (ECF No. 11). Plaintiff was directed to complete and submit a Declaration indicating if he
had opted-out of the third-party releases for the Wellpath LLC Plan. 	Plaintiff submitted his
Response on November 17, 2025. 	(ECF No. 12). 	In his Response, Plaintiff checked “Yes” in
response to the question of whether he had communicated to the Bankruptcy Court that he wished
to opt-out of the Third-Party Release. (Id. at 1). To explain his answer, he states: “Their use of
Chapter 11 was to stall or prevent my lawsuit for damages.” 	(Id.). 	Plaintiff does not submit a
copy of any communication with the Bankruptcy Court to support his Response.
Case 6:24-cv-06135-SOH Document 13 Filed 11/19/25 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>

3
All pro se filings in the Wellpath Bankruptcy are now being docketed in Wellpath SF
Holdco, LLC, Case No. 24-90566 (ARP). 	Review of both this docket and the docket for the
original bankruptcy case indicates that Plaintiff is not listed as one of the pro se parties who have
opted-out of the third-party releases contained in the Wellpath Bankruptcy Plan. 	Accordingly,
Plaintiff cannot proceed in this Court for his individual capacity claims against the named
Defendants, who are Wellpath LLC employees.
II. 	CONCLUSION
For the reason discussed above, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF
No. 1) be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Referral Status: This case should not remain referred because all matters have been
recommended for dismissal in this Report and Recommendation.
The parties have fourteen (14) days from receipt of the Report and Recommendation
in which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely
objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. 	The parties are
reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the
district court.
DATED this 19th day of November 2025.
/s/
Mark E. Ford
HON. MARK E. FORD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 6:24-cv-06135-SOH Document 13 Filed 11/19/25 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>