German Coreas v. Miller

536 F. App'x 708
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedAugust 2, 2013
Docket12-17538
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 536 F. App'x 708 (German Coreas v. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
German Coreas v. Miller, 536 F. App'x 708 (9th Cir. 2013).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner German Coreas appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Coreas failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether a one-day delay in changing Coreas’s bandages following knee surgery caused him to contract cellulitis or to suffer further injury and undue pain. See Jett v. Penner, 439 F.3d 1091, 1096 (9th Cir.2006) (setting forth standard for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, and explaining that a prisoner must show harm “caused by” the indifference to establish deliberate indifference); Toguchi, 391 F.3d at 1057-58 (neither negligence nor prisoner’s difference of opinion with prison medical authorities is sufficient to state a deliberate indifference claim); Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 746 (9th Cir.2002) (prisoner alleging deliberate indifference based on delay in treatment must show that delay led to further injury).

Coreas’s contentions regarding the district court’s alleged failure to review his medical journal evidence, and to weigh properly the testimony of an expert witness submitted by defendant, are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gonzales v. Garcia
S.D. California, 2021

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
536 F. App'x 708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/german-coreas-v-miller-ca9-2013.