Opinion
C.A. No. 03-5058.
March 1, 2005
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Bernard Anderson ("Anderson"), a prisoner in state custody, filed this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Anderson attempts to state a claim of deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. By prior order, the defendants have been limited to those in their individual capacity. We have also denied a motion for preliminary injunction and a motion to amend the complaint. Presently, before this court is a motion by defendant Michael Pisano, P.A. ("Pisano") to dismiss the complaint. For the reasons which follow the motion is granted.
Anderson alleges that Pisano failed to properly diagnosis and treat Anderson's alleged medical emergency. At the heart of the plaintiff's complaint is his belief that he has scabies, a venereal disease, despite having been diagnosed instead with genital warts by prison doctors. Assuming, arguendo, that the plaintiff's allegations of having scabies are true, the plaintiff's claim against defendant Pisano fails because the complaint does not plead the elements of a deliberate indifference claim.
To state a cause of action for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need, Anderson must allege that Pisano both knew of and ignored a substantial risk to Anderson's health. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994). To satisfy the knowledge prong, Anderson must show that Pisano was not only aware of a situation from which it could be surmised that a substantial risk of harm existed, but also that Pisano actually came to that conclusion. Id. These elements have been translated into the affirmative pleading requirement of a culpable state of mind. Muhammad v. Schwartz, 1997 WL 43015, *3 (E.D. Pa. January 27, 1997) (citing Nami v. Fauver, 82 F.3d 63, 67 (3d Cir. 1996). It is not enough to merely allege that "the doctors misdiagnosed his condition, that the doctors' method of physical examination and treatment may not have followed community standards, or that the doctors disagreed with his suggested course of treatment." Id. (internal quotations omitted) (citing Bellecourt v. United States, 994 F.2d 427, 431 (8th Cir. 1993); see also Outterbridge v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, 2000 WL 795874, *2 (E.D. Pa. June 7, 2000) (holding that where a plaintiff fails to allege that doctors knew of and disregarded serious risks to prisoner, plaintiff failed to state cause of action, even though prisoner ultimately died from mistreatment). Therefore, the sole allegation by Anderson against Pisano, that Pisano failed "to properly diagnose and prescribe treatment for a medical emergency," C. at ¶ 4, is not enough to state a claim for deliberate indifference of a serious medical need.
We express no opinion on whether Anderson may state a claim for medical malpractice under state law.
We hasten to add that the prior proceedings in this case have preliminarily established that the plaintiff does not have the venereal disease alleged, negating any claim of a medical emergency. In deciding a motion to dismiss, the court ordinarily accepts as true all the allegations in the complaint and determines whether the plaintiff has asserted a legal claim on which relief may be granted. Here, however, as part of our order denying Anderson's motion for a preliminary injunction, the court determined that Anderson failed to establish that he suffered from scabies. Therefore, there was no medical emergency for Pisano to ignore. Irrespective of whether Anderson is able to show he has scabies, it remains that the disease is not immediately life threatening, so as to support a deliberate indifference claim.
Therefore, the plaintiff has failed to state a claim against defendant Pisano on which relief may be granted, and the defendant's motion to dismiss must be granted.
ORDER
The motion of Michael Pisano, P.A. to dismiss the complaint of Bernard Anderson (#31) is GRANTED.The claims of the complaint against Michael Pisano, P.A. are DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.