Johnson v. Wright

Second Circuit

Johnson v. Wright

324 F. App'x 144

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 21, 2009

DocketNo. 07-1488-pr

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 324 F. App'x 144 (Johnson v. Wright) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Johnson v. Wright, 324 F. App'x 144 (2d Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-appellant James K. Johnson appeals pro se from a March 14, 2007 judgment dismissing his complaint against ten employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services for allegedly violating his Eighth Amendment rights by providing inadequate medical treatment for a knee injury during his incarceration at Five Points Correctional Facility. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues on appeal.

In order to withstand a motion for summary judgment, Johnson must come forward with evidence showing that defendants “acted with deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs.” Pabon v. Wright, 459 F.3d 241, 247 (2d Cir.2006) (citing Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104, 97 S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976)). Johnson has failed to meet this burden. As the District Court explained, “[Johnson] was treated for knee pain, and surgery was performed. That plaintiff may have preferred a more aggressive course of treatment, or more prompt surgery, does not show that defendants acted wantonly with the purpose of causing him pain.” Johnson v. Wright, 477 F.Supp.2d 572, 576 (W.D.N.Y.2007). We agree with the District Court’s assessment of the record, and Johnson’s new factual allegations, raised for the first time on appeal, do not compel a different result. See, e.g., Robinson v. Gov’t of Malaysia, 269 F.3d 133, 146 (2d Cir.2001) (“In the absence of manifest injustice, we will not hear ... an assertion [not raised in the district court].” (internal quotation marks omitted)).

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court.

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

SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-appellant James K. Johnson appeals pro se from a March 14, 2007 judgment dismissing his complaint against ten employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services for allegedly violating his Eighth Amendment rights by providing inadequate medical treatment for a knee injury during his incarceration at Five Points Correctional Facility. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues on appeal.

In order to withstand a motion for summary judgment, Johnson must come forward with evidence showing that defendants “acted with deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs.” Pabon v. Wright, 459 F.3d 241, 247 (2d Cir.2006) (citing Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104, 97 S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976)). Johnson has failed to meet this burden. As the District Court explained, “[Johnson] was treated for knee pain, and surgery was performed. That plaintiff may have preferred a more aggressive course of treatment, or more prompt surgery, does not show that defendants acted wantonly with the purpose of causing him pain.” Johnson v. Wright, 477 F.Supp.2d 572, 576 (W.D.N.Y.2007). We agree with the District Court’s assessment of the record, and Johnson’s new factual allegations, raised for the first time on appeal, do not compel a different result. See, e.g., Robinson v. Gov’t of Malaysia, 269 F.3d 133, 146 (2d Cir.2001) (“In the absence of manifest injustice, we will not hear ... an assertion [not raised in the district court].” (internal quotation marks omitted)).

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

324 F. App'x 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-wright-ca2-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack