Lehman

Van Court v. Lehman

Good Law
137 F. App'x 948
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 24, 2005No. 04-35815; D.C. No. CV-02-01142-JCCCalifornia457 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Billy Van Court, a Washington State prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison officials were deliberately indifferent to his safety by failing to protect him from attack by another inmate, and failing to provide adequate medical care for his resulting injuries. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1131 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Van Court’s claim that defendants failed to protect him from attack by another inmate during a sex- *950 offender treatment program group meeting, because the evidence does not create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants should have foreseen this attack. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (holding that to act with deliberate indifference, a prison official must be aware of facts from which he could infer the existence of a substantial risk of serious harm).

The district court also properly-granted summary judgment on Van Court’s claim that…

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.