Raymond D. JACKSON, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Duncan A. McINTOSH; David Victorino, Defendants-Appellants

Good Law
81 F.3d 112·96 Daily Journal DAR 4189·1996 WL 167582·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 7463
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 11, 199694-16741California770 words

Opinion

Opinion

Noonan, J.

Raymond D. Jackson, a state prisoner on dialysis, brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 contending that Dr. Duncan McIntosh and Dr. David Victorino had violated his rights under the Eighth Amendment by refusing him a kidney transplant. The doctors moved for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. The district court denied the motion. The doctors appeal.

ANALYSIS

The doctors contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity because there was no clearly established law requiring them to provide a kidney transplant to a prisoner on dialysis. The doctors state the issue too narrowly. “The right the official is alleged to have violated must be made specific in regard to the kind of action complained of for the constitutional right at issue to have been clearly established.” Sinaloa Lake Owners Ass’n v. City of Simi Valley, 70 F.3d 1095, 1100-01 (9th Cir.1995). It is settled law that deliberate indifference to serious medical needs of prisoners violates the Eighth Amendment. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104 , 97 S.Ct. 285, 291 , 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976). “Prison officials are indifferent to prisoners’ serious medical needs when they deny, delay, or…

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.