Roesevelt Hayes v. William Benton

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 20-1952 ___________________________

Roesevelt Hayes

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

William Benton, Health Services Administrator, Tucker Max Infirmary; Erica Johnson, Director of Nurses, Tucker Max Infirmary; Patrick Drummond, ARNP, Tucker Max Infirmary; Shaun Young, ARNP, Tucker Max Infirmary

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees

Correct Care Solutions, Inc., CCS

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Pine Bluff ____________

Submitted: December 22, 2020 Filed: December 29, 2020 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, WOLLMAN, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM. Arkansas inmate Roesevelt Hayes appeals from the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment on the merits of Hayes’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon de novo review, see Murchison v. Rogers, 779 F.3d 882, 886-87 (8th Cir. 2015) (viewing record in light most favorable to non-movant, and drawing all reasonable inferences in his favor), we conclude that the district court properly analyzed the Eighth Amendment claims, see Fourte v. Faulkner Cnty., Ark., 746 F.3d 384, 387 (8th Cir. 2014) (deliberate indifference requires showing defendants knew of, but deliberately disregarded, objectively serious medical needs). Likewise, we find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s decision to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims. See Zubrod v. Hoch, 907 F.3d 568, 580 (8th Cir. 2018) (standard of review). The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Patricia S. Harris, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-2-