Brown v. Osmundson

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-prison medical personnel’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff-prisoner’s section 1983 action, alleging that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs by delaying treatment for his ruptured appendix. With respect to defendant-prison doctor, defendant failed to present evidence that doctor was deliberately indifferent to his medical needs, even though plaintiff asserted that he experienced delayed treatment for his ruptured appendix and experienced continued ineffective treatment that concerned giving him pain medication, where: (1) prison doctor modified treatment as plaintiff’s symptoms became worse; (2) plaintiff’s blood and urine tests were essentially normal, and plaintiff did not display symptoms associated with ruptured appendix; (3) doctor’s care was not substantial departure from accepted professional judgment; and (4) there was no evidence that prison doctor ever knew of and disregarded substantial risk of appendicitis. Also, defendants-prison nurses were entitled to summary judgment, where: (1) one nurse acted appropriately with respect to initial belief that plaintiff’s pain was caused by pre-existing hernia; and (2) other nurse diligently cared for plaintiff, checked his vitals and relayed necessary information to prison doctor.