From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Espinal v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 21, 1990
161 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

May 21, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We agree with the Supreme Court's determination that the record does not support the petitioner's claim that the correctional authorities have been deliberately indifferent to his medical needs (see, Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104; Matter of De Flumer v. Dalsheim, 122 A.D.2d 872, 873; Matter of Ronson v Commissioner of Correction, 112 A.D.2d 488, 489). Nor is there anything in the record which suggests that the court should substitute its judgment for that of the treating physicians (see, Matter of De Flumer v. Dalsheim, supra). Accordingly, the petition was properly denied. Kooper, J.P., Sullivan, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Espinal v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 21, 1990
161 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Espinal v. Coughlin

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of HERMINIO ESPINAL, Appellant, v. THOMAS A. COUGHLIN III…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 21, 1990

Citations

161 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
555 N.Y.S.2d 848

Citing Cases

In re Eagen

To the contrary, the record before us reveals that petitioner has received adequate medical treatment. Thus,…