Summary
The court screened Scott E. McIntire’s amended prisoner complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and allowed him to proceed against Dr. Nancy B. Marthakis in her individual capacity for alleged deliberate indifference to serious medical needs related to his deteriorating right hip. The court dismissed all other claims and directed the plaintiff to serve the defendant because he was not proceeding in forma pauperis.
Holdings
- McIntire plausibly alleged an objectively serious medical need based on his severely deteriorating right hip and the medical recommendations for hip-replacement surgery.
- McIntire stated an Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim against Dr. Marthakis based on the alleged prolonged failure to secure treatment for his deteriorating hip.
- The complaint stated a claim because it alleged more than negligence, a demand for specific care, or a disagreement over the best possible treatment.
Questions Presented
- Whether McIntire alleged an objectively serious medical need under the Eighth Amendment.
- Whether McIntire plausibly alleged that Dr. Marthakis acted with deliberate indifference to that medical need.
- Whether the amended complaint stated a claim warranting leave to proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (8)
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007)(followed)
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104 (1976)(followed)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994)(followed)
- Greeno v. Daley, 414 F.3d 645, 653 (7th Cir. 2005)(followed)
- Board v. Farnham, 394 F.3d 469, 478 (7th Cir. 2005)(followed)
- Jackson v. Kotter, 541 F.3d 688, 697 (7th Cir. 2008)(followed)
- Walker v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc., 940 F.3d 954, 965 (7th Cir. 2019)(followed)
- Forbes v. Edgar, 112 F.3d 262, 267 (7th Cir. 1997)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…