Jerry Champion v. Wendy Kelley
This text of 495 F. App'x 769 (Jerry Champion v. Wendy Kelley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
After Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC) inmate Jerry Champion did not receive two of three daily doses of pain medication on January 26, 2010, he filed *770 this 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action asserting claims of deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs against the nurse who dispensed his medication, the infirmary director, and ADC’s Deputy Director of Health. The district court 1 granted defendants’ motions for summary judgment, and Champion appeals.
Following de novo review, see Beaulieu v. Ludeman, 690 F.3d 1017, 1024 (8th Cir. 2012), we agree with the district court that Champion’s deliberate-indifference claims fail, because the record established there was no indifference to a serious medical need, much less deliberate indifference. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104-05, 97 S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976) (deliberate indifference includes intentional interference with prescribed treatment; inadvertent or negligent failure to provide adequate medical care cannot be said to constitute “unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain”); Luckert v. Dodge Cnty., 684 F.3d 808, 817 (8th Cir.2012) (prison supervisors are not liable under § 1983 on re-spondeat superior theory), petition for cert. filed, (Oct 24, 2012) (No. 12-523); Gardner v. Howard, 109 F.3d 427, 430 (8th Cir.1997) (no § 1983 liability for violation of prison policy).
Accordingly, we affirm, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and we deny all of the pending motions.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
495 F. App'x 769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jerry-champion-v-wendy-kelley-ca8-2012.