Mitchell v. Kallas

In section 1983 action filed by plaintiff-prisoner alleging that defendants prison officials and parole officers were deliberately indifferent to plaintiff’s gender dysphoria condition by delaying 13 months to assess plaintiff’s request for hormone therapy and by ultimately denying said treatment on ground that plaintiff’s imminent release from prison dictated that said treatment not be administered at that time, Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-prison psychologist’s summary judgment motion where record did not indicate that said defendant played any role in instant delay in assessing plaintiff's condition or had any authority to order hormone treatment. Also, Dist. Ct. did not err in granting portion of defendant-prison doctor’s summary judgment motion with respect to instant 13-month delay in assessing plaintiff’s request for hormone therapy, since said defendant was not on notice that instant delay would violate plaintiff’s rights. However, Dist. Ct. erred in granting said defendant’s portion of summary judgment motion dealing with any failure to treat plaintiff’s gender dysphoria condition throughout duration of plaintiff’s prison stay, where there was question as to whether prison had policy regarding said treatment and whether there was medical reason for deciding not to start treatment prior to plaintiff’s release from prison. Also, Dist. Ct. erred in granting summary judgment motion filed by defendants-parole officers, where plaintiff alleged that said defendants blocked plaintiff’s attempt to obtain hormone treatment while on parole even though medical professional had recommended said treatment.