Steve Emerson v. MD Robert Strehlow, VI

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina adopts a Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and dismisses Steve Emerson’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice. The court concludes that allegations concerning surgery and medical treatment, even if construed as medical malpractice or gross negligence, do not establish deliberate indifference to a serious medical need under the Eighth Amendment. The court also dismisses the remaining state-law claims for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. Allegations amounting to medical malpractice, even when liberally construed, do not state a § 1983 claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need absent facts showing a constitutional violation.
2. After dismissal of the federal § 1983 claims, the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims because no alternative basis for federal jurisdiction, including diversity jurisdiction, was alleged.
3. The court adopted the Report and Recommendation after finding no clear error in the unobjected-to portions and no error in the portions specifically challenged by Plaintiff.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's allegations that a physician performed an allegedly unauthorized and harmful surgery stated a claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need under the Eighth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
2. Whether the district court retained subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state-law claims after dismissing the federal § 1983 claim.
3. Whether the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation should be adopted over Plaintiff's objections.

Disposition

dismissed