Jennings v. Dombeck et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin grants renewed motions for summary judgment in Damonta Jennings’s action concerning alleged inadequate treatment of keratoconus. The Court enters judgment for the defendants on the Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim and declines supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law medical-malpractice and negligent-supervision claims, dismissing the case.

Holdings

1. The defendants were entitled to summary judgment because no reasonable juror could find that any defendant was deliberately indifferent to Jennings's serious medical needs.
2. The record did not establish that any defendant was personally responsible for an unreasonable delay in Jennings's receipt of corneal cross-linking.
3. The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law medical malpractice and negligent supervision claims after dismissing the federal claim and dismissed those claims without prejudice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the defendants were deliberately indifferent under the Eighth Amendment to Jennings's serious medical need by allegedly delaying, canceling, or inadequately coordinating keratoconus treatment.
2. Whether the evidence showed that any defendant caused a treatment delay that exacerbated Jennings's injury or unnecessarily prolonged his pain.
3. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law medical malpractice and negligent supervision claims after dismissing the federal claim.

Disposition

dismissed