Robert Johnson v. Arnold Schwarzenegger

Good Law
366 F. App'x 767
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 19, 201008-16014California949 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

We reverse the summary judgment entered by the district court in favor of Defendants Traquina and Naku, and we affirm the summary judgment in favor of Defendant Hughey.

The district court’s order appears to accept as true statements made in declarations submitted by Defendants that are disputed by Plaintiff. For example, the Findings and Recommendations (F & R) adopted by the district court stated that “there was no interruption of his Lactulose refills from June 2005 to October 29, 2005.” There was, however, conflicting evidence as to that issue. The F & R said that “Plaintiff did not file any inmate 602 complaints or otherwise complain to any of the doctors herein (or to anyone else) that his medication was not being timely delivered at any time from June 2005 to October 29, 2005 (the date that exhibits in his complaint suggest he slipped into a coma).” But a 602 form in the record shows that on July 1, 2005, Plaintiff complained that he had been deprived of his medication for three days because he ran out on June 28.

Similarly, the F & R appears to rely upon a statement in Naku’s declaration to the effect that Plaintiff had acknowledged he received his medication…

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.