Staggs Ex Rel. the Estate of Staggs v. Doctor's Hospital of Manteca, Inc.

Good Law
608 F. App'x 514
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 26, 201513-16086California323 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts to state a claim that the prison defendants were deliberately indifferent to Robert Staggs’ medical needs.

The parties agree that Staggs had serious medical needs in the form of Hepatitis C, cirrhosis of the liver, and complications from undiagnosed liver cancer, among other ailments. The only issue is whether defendants, despite their awareness of Staggs’ needs, were deliberately indifferent either in denying medical care or in providing medically unacceptable care. Plaintiffs have alleged that prison doctors continued to recommend and eventually arranged a three-pass core liver biopsy even after two hospitals refused to perform the procedure under any circumstances because of an elevated risk of internal bleeding. That fact, accepted as true, plausibly suggests that the decision to order the biopsy was “medically unacceptable under the circumstances,” Jackson v. McIntosh, 90 F.3d 330, 332 (9th Cir.1996), rather than reflecting- a mere “difference of medical opinion.” Sanchez v. Vild, 891 F.2d 240, 242 (9th Cir.1989). This allegation adequately supports plaintiffs’ claim that the prison doctors consciously disregarded a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.