Winn

Winn v. Ely

Good Law
339 F. App'x 731
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 27, 2009No. 08-35224California418 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Tony Ray Winn, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, and denial of access to courts. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Winn’s access to courts claim because he did not offer evidence of “actual injury.” Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 348 , 116 S.Ct. 2174 , 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996) (explaining that “actual injury” is “actual prejudice with respect to contemplated or existing litigation, such as the inability to meet a filing deadline or to present a claim.”) (internal quotation omitted).

*732 The district court properly granted summary judgment on Winn’s Eighth Amendment claim because Winn failed to raise a triable issue as to whether the treatment of his fractured finger and his hip and back pain constituted deliberate indifference. See Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 744 (9th Cir.2002) (explaining that prison officials manifest a deliberate indifference to a prisoner’s…

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.