Reginald McFadden, the Claimant herein, had been scheduled for trial on Claim
Number 106235 on September 17, 2004 via video conference procedure at Sing Sing
Correctional Facility. On that date, Mr. McFadden appeared at Clinton
Correctional Facility as required. However, during the initial stage of the
video equipment set up/testing, he alleged he was unable to hear as his
prescribed hearing aids were in the process of being repaired, and had not been
returned for his use on the day of trial.
At the time, the Court noted that Claimant appeared responsive to questioning
but nonetheless directed that if Claimant furnished proof of his inability to
hear without the use of hearing aids, the matter would be adjourned as he
requested. If such proof was not furnished within ten (10) days, the Claim would
be dismissed, given that this was the second time Claimant had requested an
adjournment of this Court at the time of trial.
Claimant has submitted a letter dated September 17, 2004 enclosing copies of a
testing form from Adirondack Audiology Associates, P.C. dated December 14, 2000,
as well as a copy of a grievance disposition from the Superintendent dated April
5, 2004, wherein the Claimant had apparently sought consultation with an
Under the "diagnosis" section of the testing form, someone has written:
"moderately severe to profound . . . (illegible) hearing loss for all
frequencies on right ear; profound loss for all frequencies on left ear." The
"recommendations" portion of the testing form is largely illegible, however it
does say something about "amplification to right ear."
The grievance form provides: "The grievant is requesting to be seen by an
Audiologist. A consultation for Audiology services was submitted grievant
3/10/04 and was approved. Grievant is scheduled to be seen and reevaluated by
the Audiologist April 7, 2004 . . . " (sic). In the appeal portion of
the form, dated by Claimant April 7, 2004, Claimant writes: "I was seen by the
Audiologist who took my old hearing aide (sic) to repair them, leaving me
Additionally, Claimant submitted a Memorandum from Dale Artus, Superintendent
of Clinton Correctional Facility, to Claimant, dated September 22, 2004 that
provides: "I am in receipt of your recent undated communication received in my
office on September 21, 2004. I have personally reviewed your medical concerns
with the Nurse Administrator. She advised that you were seen on September 3,
2004 by the audiologist. At that time it was noted that your ‘current
amplication' was not working properly and you will be rescheduled for the next
clinic to refit you for new power amplication. In summary, on September 17,
2004 you did not have your hearing aids and you are currently scheduled to see
the audiologist within the next two weeks."
After carefully considering these submissions, and in light of the apparent
medical need for hearing aids to assist Claimant in accurately hearing any
proceedings he might be involved in - and the lack of any contradictory medical
information - the Court grants the requested adjournment.
The Clerk is instructed to assure that any new trial date is scheduled after
Claimant once again has the use of his hearing aids.