McDonald v. Hardy

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants-prison officials’ motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action alleging that defendants displayed deliberate indifference to plaintiff-prisoner’s medical diagnosis of arthritis and high cholesterol by decreasing frequency of outdoor recreation for inmates to two days per week, where plaintiff failed to present any evidence that physician had specified minimum level of outdoor recreation to treat his medical condition. However, Dist. Ct. erred in granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment in plaintiff’s similar claim that defendants were indifferent to his medical condition by eliminating plaintiff’s special diet, where: (1) elimination of plaintiff’s special diet was not decision made by medical professional; (2) plaintiff testified without rebuttal that his current level of cholesterol, after being taken off special diet, was too high; and (3) plaintiff testified that combination of medication, special diet and exercise was medically accepted method of lowering high cholesterol.