Finley

MEMORANDUM **

Jowell Finley (“Finley”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Linda Parker (“Parker”) in Finley’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Parker. Finley, an inmate in the California penal system, has alleged that Parker, a prison dental assistant, was indifferent to his dental needs and interfered with his access to necessary treatment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. 1 We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.

To avoid transgressing the Eighth Amendment’s proscription against “cruel and unusual punishment,” a state must provide medical care to those placed in its care through incarceration (see the seminal opinion in Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 103 , 97 S.Ct. 285 , 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976)). Constitutionally inadequate medical care is established by a showing of (1) deliberate indifference (2) to a serious medical need of an inmate (id. at 104). Dental care is included in the state’s medical care obligation (Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1253 (9th Cir.1982)).

We reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment with respect to tooth # 32. Genuine issues of material fact exist, so that summary judgment is inappropriate as to…