Spencer Pierce v. Richard Long

Good Law
503 F. App'x 524
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 2, 201310-16692California326 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Spencer Pierce appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment based on its holding that none of the defendants-appellees were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. Because the parties are well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of this case, we repeat them only as necessary to illuminate this disposition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Deliberate indifference requires an individual defendant to act in a manner akin to criminal recklessness. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994). Even grossly negligent conduct will not support a claim. Toguchi v. Soon Hwang Chung, 891 F.3d 1051, 1060 (9th Cir.2004) (citing Wood v. Housetvright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1334 (9th Cir. 1990). The record does not contain evidence sufficient to support Pierce’s allegations that any of the defendants-appellees were deliberately indifferent to Pierce’s medical needs.

With respect to Pierce’s finger injury, Dr. Long’s treatment does not appear to be negligent in any way, and no reasonable juror could believe that Dr. Long prevented Pierce from receiving treatment in light of Dr. Long’s recommendations.…

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.