From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vasquez v. Leonard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Nov 7, 2012
Civ. No. 12-955 (PAM/FLN) (D. Minn. Nov. 7, 2012)

Opinion

Civ. No. 12-955 (PAM/FLN)

11-07-2012

Orlando Vasquez, Plaintiff, v. Todd Leonard and Marty Lagenfield, Defendants.


ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel dated October 22, 2012. In the R&R, Magistrate Judge Noel recommends the dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint seeking an Order requiring Defendants to prescribe him a particular medication to treat his depression and suicidal tendencies and the payment of $200,000 in damages. Plaintiff filed timely objections to the R&R.

According to statute, the Court must conduct a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge's opinion to which specific objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b). Based on that de novo review, the Court adopts the R&R.

Plaintiff contends that Defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights by failing to treat his depression in the manner of his choosing. Defendants initially prescribed Plaintiff bupropion to treat his depression, but discontinued that prescription when Plaintiff was caught "cheeking" the medication. Defendants subsequently prescribed three different substitute medications, which Plaintiff has refused to take. Plaintiff would apparently prefer to be prescribed bupropion.

Plaintiff's disagreement about the precise method of his treatment does not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. See Estate of Rosenberg v. Crandell, 56 F.3d 35, 37 (8th Cir. 1995) ("The prisoner must show more than negligence, more even than gross negligence, and mere disagreement with treatment decisions does not rise to the level of a constitutional violation."). The Court therefore agrees with Magistrate Judge Noel's conclusion and determines that Plaintiff has not established a violation of the Eighth Amendment or any other constitutional rights.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The R&R (Docket No. 101) is ADOPTED; and

2. The case is DISMISSED with prejudice.

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

_______________

Paul A. Magnuson

United States District Court Judge


Summaries of

Vasquez v. Leonard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Nov 7, 2012
Civ. No. 12-955 (PAM/FLN) (D. Minn. Nov. 7, 2012)
Case details for

Vasquez v. Leonard

Case Details

Full title:Orlando Vasquez, Plaintiff, v. Todd Leonard and Marty Lagenfield…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Date published: Nov 7, 2012

Citations

Civ. No. 12-955 (PAM/FLN) (D. Minn. Nov. 7, 2012)