528 F.2d 318 (4th Cir. 1975)

From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Russell v. Sheffer

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Dec 19, 1975

528 F.2d 318 (4th Cir. 1975)

Summary

holding that mere disagreement between an inmate and medical staff regarding the proper course of treatment provides no basis for relief

Summary of this case from Webb v. Driver

See 25 Summaries

Opinion

No. 75-1423.

Submitted November 24, 1975.

Decided December 19, 1975.

Albert Russell, appellant pro se.

Stuart Bateman, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia.

Before RUSSELL, FIELD, and WIDENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Albert Russell instituted an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that he was being denied adequate medical treatment while incarcerated at Botetourt Correctional Field Unit. The District Court, on the basis of affidavits and exhibits, granted summary judgment for the defendants. We affirm.

Prisoners are entitled to reasonable medical care. Blanks v. Cunningham, 409 F.2d 220 (4th Cir. 1969); Hirons v. Director, 351 F.2d 613 (4th Cir. 1965). However, mistreatment or nontreatment must be capable of characterization as "cruel and unusual punishment" in order to present a colorable claim under § 1983. Gittlemacker v. Prasse, 428 F.2d 1, 6 (3rd Cir. 1970). The prisoner's allegations must reach constitutional dimension before a federal court will interfere with the internal operations of a state penal facility. Hirons v. Director, 351 F.2d 613 (4th Cir. 1965).

Russell's claims do not rise to this level. The affidavits submitted to the District Court reflect that Russell was under constant medical supervision from the time of his arrival at Botetourt. Questions of medical judgment are not subject to judicial review. Shields v. Kunkel, 442 F.2d 409 (9th Cir. 1971).

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Summaries of

Russell v. Sheffer

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Dec 19, 1975

528 F.2d 318 (4th Cir. 1975)

holding that mere disagreement between an inmate and medical staff regarding the proper course of treatment provides no basis for relief

Summary of this case from Webb v. Driver

holding that "[q]uestions of medical judgment are not subject to judicial review" under § 1983

Summary of this case from De'lonta v. Angelone

holding that "questions of medical judgment are not subject to judicial review" under § 1983

Summary of this case from Bugg v. Burrell

holding that "mistreatment or non-treatment must be capable of characterization as 'cruel and unusual punishment' in order to present a colorable claim under § 1983" and that "[q]uestions of medical judgment are not subject to judicial review"

Summary of this case from Costine v. Correct Care Sols.

holding that questions of medical judgment are not subject to judicial review

Summary of this case from Garibaldi v. Villasis

Summary of this case from McKinnon v. Gilmore

holding that a prisoner is not entitled to choose his course of treatment

Summary of this case from Warren v. Worley

holding that a prisoner is not entitled to choose his course of treatment

Summary of this case from Graham v. Stansberry

finding that an inmate's disagreement concerning "[q]uestions of medical judgment are not subject to judicial review"

Summary of this case from Wilson v. Argila

finding questions of medical judgment not subject to judicial review under § 1983

Summary of this case from Rudd v. Arney

finding that medical judgments are not judicially reviewable

Summary of this case from Townsend v. Azumah

finding that questions of medical judgment are not subject to judicial review

Summary of this case from Tucker v. Department of Corrections

finding that medical judgments are not judicially reviewable

Summary of this case from Latham v. Johnson

finding that medical judgments are not judicially reviewable

Summary of this case from Harper v. Kentucky Department of Corrections

concluding that, where a prisoner was under constant medical supervision, his claims did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Henson v. Weber

concluding that, where a prisoner was under constant medical supervision, his claims did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Wallop v. Buck

concluding that, where a prisoner was under constant medical supervision, his claims did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Wright v. Shearin

concluding that, where a prisoner was under constant medical supervision, his claims did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Rychwalski v. CMS

concluding that, where a prisoner was under constant medical supervision, his claims did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Blankumsee v. Shearin

concluding that, where a prisoner was under constant medical supervision, his claims did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Nettles v. Med. Dep't

concluding that, where a prisoner was under constant medical supervision, his claims did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Lattisaw v. D.O.C. Med.

concluding that, where a prisoner was under constant medical supervision, his claims did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Lattisaw v. E. Corr. Inst. Med.

noting an inmate's allegations of unreasonable medical care "must reach constitutional dimension before a federal court will interfere with the internal operations" of a penal facility and that "[q]uestions of medical judgment are not subject to judicial review"

Summary of this case from Jones v. BOP Dir.

stating questions of medical judgment are not subject to judicial review

Summary of this case from Horton v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.

indicating prisoner allegations of medical mistreatment or non-treatment must meet a high bar to state a claim under section 1983

Summary of this case from Collins v. S. Health Partners

Russell v. Sheffer

Summary

Opinion

Russell v. Sheffer

Russell v. Sheffer

Case Details

Citations

Citing Cases

Russell v. Sheffer

Summary

Opinion

Russell v. Sheffer

Russell v. Sheffer

Case Details

CitationsCopy Citation

Citing Cases

Citations