Patrick Russell v. Jocelyn Lumitap

Good Law
31 F.4th 729
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 13, 202218-55831California7,022 words

Opinion

Opinion

KLEINFELD, J.

facts most favorably to the plaintiffs, Dr. Le, the on-call physician at the time, could not have reasonably believed based on the clearly established law as it stood then that he could provide constitutionally adequate care without even examining a patient with Russell’s symptoms who had not responded to a dose of nitroglycerin. Therefore, the district court was correct in denying summary judgment on qualified immunity to Dr. Le. The panel held that Nurse Teofilo had access to facts from which an inference could be drawn that Russell was at serious risk. Yet she did not call the paramedics, nor did she call Dr. Le to ask whether Russell’s worsening symptoms required anything more than the Motrin that had previously been prescribed. The district court was correct in denying summary judgment on qualified immunity to Nurse Teofilo. A reasonable jury could conclude that she met the standard for deliberate indifference.

The panel held that Nurse Trout was entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity. A jury could not, on the facts pleaded, reasonably conclude that Nurse Trout was deliberately indifferent. Though perhaps she should have called the paramedics, her having…

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.