2004), or interfered with his access to treatment. There is similarly no evidence to suggest that the non-medical defendants had any reason to believe that the medical team was mistreating Washington, see Spruill v. Because medical care was provided and there is no evidence that it violated professional standards of care, we presume that his treatment was proper. ![]() Even assuming that Washington's medical needs are "serious," his medical records reflect that the prison's medical team responded to his frequent sick call requests and provided extensive medical care. In brief, the District Court correctly found no genuine question of material fact regarding Washington's deliberate indifference claim. We agree with the District Court's disposition of this case and need not repeat its thorough analyses here. ![]() We may summarily affirm if the appeal fails to present a substantial question. 2011), and the denial of the motion for reconsideration for an abuse of discretion, Walker v. We review de novo the orders granting the motions to dismiss and for summary judgment, Barefoot Architect, Inc. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Washington now appeals and requests the appointment of counsel. Washington filed an "objection," which the District Court construed as a timely motion for reconsideration and denied. The remaining parties submitted motions for summary judgment, and the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants. Defendants filed motions to dismiss, and the District Court dismissed the claims against Defendants Girone, Irwin, Maust, Sroka, Pe-schock, and Donnelly, the RLUIPA claims, and the allegation of conspiracy by certain defendants. ![]() In 2019, Washington filed a civil rights complaint alleging violations of the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments, and the Religious Land Use and Inmate Protection Act (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. Henry Unseld Washington, an inmate at State Correctional Institution - Somerset proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals from the District Court's order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants. 3:19-cv-00196) District Judge: Honorable Lisa Pupo Lenihanīefore: AMBRO, SHWARTZ, and BIBAS, Circuit Judges On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (D.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) or Summary Action Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. Submitted for Possible Dismissal Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |