Woods v. Strack

United States District Court for the District of Oregon · June 9, 2025 · No. 2:23-cv-01253-MC

Summary

This United States District Court opinion grants the defendant's motion for summary judgment in a prisoner civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff alleged that a nurse practitioner exhibited deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs by discontinuing his heart medication prescription without consulting his cardiologist. The court found that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence that the defendant acted with conscious disregard of an excessive risk or that the prescription change caused his subsequent medical episode. Consequently, the claim was dismissed, and the plaintiff's in forma pauperis status was revoked.

Court
United States District Court for the District of Oregon
Writing for the Court
Michael J. McShane
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the District of Oregon
Decision date
June 9, 2025
Docket number
2:23-cv-01253-MC
Procedural posture
Defendant's motion for summary judgment granted; plaintiff's complaint dismissed.
Standard of review
Summary judgment standard under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56.
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

section 1983civil rightscruel and unusual punishmentsummary judgmentcivil procedure

Practice areas

civil rightscivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Defendant's discontinuation of Plaintiff's Metoprolol prescription constitutes deliberate indifference under the Eighth Amendment sufficient to survive summary judgment
  2. Whether summary judgment is appropriate where no genuine issue of material fact exists

Holdings

  1. Summary judgment is granted because plaintiff failed to present evidence that Defendant knowingly disregarded an excessive risk to his health; therefore no genuine issue of material fact exists as to deliberate indifference.
  2. Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Key quotations

“Summary judgment is appropriate when ‘there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.’" (at 2)
“A prison official acts with deliberate indifference ‘only if the [official] knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health and safety.’" (at 2)

Factual background

In April 2020 the plaintiff suffered cardiac arrest and received a cardioverter‑defibrillator. He was prescribed Metoprolol with a refill schedule. In July 2021 a nurse practitioner discontinued the plaintiff's existing prescription and issued a new two‑month supply, advising the plaintiff to take it as prescribed and return for follow‑up. The plaintiff did not refill the medication after it expired in September 2021 and subsequently suffered a ventricular fibrillation episode in November 2021.

Procedural history

Plaintiff filed a §1983 action alleging deliberate indifference under the Eighth Amendment. Defendant moved for summary judgment. The court granted the motion and dismissed the action.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…