McClure v. Broadbent

259 F. App'x 9
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided December 10, 2007·No. No. 06-17286·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

John Patrick McClure, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging prison dentist Dr. Charles Broadbent acted with deliberate indifference to his medical needs. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Delta Savings Bank v. United States, 265 F.3d 1017, 1021 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment, because McClure failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Broadbent acted with deliberate indifference in treating his dental needs. See Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057-60 (9th Cir.2004). The record contains evidence that Broadbent provided treatment for McClure’s dental problems and McClure failed to produce evidence to support his allegation that Broadbent embedded a piece of steel into his tooth.

McClure’s motion for appointment of counsel is denied because McClure failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. [10] See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.1991).

McClure’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

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

McClure v. Broadbent, 259 F. App'x 9 (9th Cir. 2007).

259 F. App'x 9 (McClure v. Broadbent) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Delta Savings Bank v. United States
265 F.3d 1017 (Ninth Circuit, 2001)
Toguchi v. Soon Hwang Chung
391 F.3d 1051 (Ninth Circuit, 2004)