Summary
Ingram v. Alvarado, an unpublished Fifth Circuit opinion, affirms dismissal of a prisoner’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 deliberate-indifference claim under Rule 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The court held that allegations of negligence or medical malpractice—such as misdiagnosing pain or failing to attribute kidney failure to medication—do not satisfy the subjective deliberate-indifference standard. The dismissal also counts as a “strike” under § 1915(g), and the prisoner is warned about restrictions on future in forma pauperis filings after three strikes.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Ingram alleged sufficient facts to state a claim of deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs under §1983.
Holdings
- Allegations of negligence or medical malpractice do not establish a claim of deliberate indifference.
Key quotations
“At most, Ingram’s claims regarding Alvarado’s actions in prescribing medication and Martin’s actions in attributing his pain to a strained muscle amounted to allegations of negligence or medical malpractice, and such allegations do not establish a claim of deliberate indifference.” (2)
Factual background
Ingram, a Texas prisoner, alleged that defendants Alvarado (a medical professional) and Martin (a prison official) were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. He claimed that Alvarado prescribed medication that caused kidney failure, and that Martin incorrectly told him his pain was due to a strained muscle. The court found that these allegations, at most, sounded in negligence or medical malpractice.
Procedural history
The district court dismissed the complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. Ingram appealed.