×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Dismissal of HCV Claim Affirmed
The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the grant of summary
judgment to defendant prison officials by the U.S. District Court, Eastern
District of Kentucky in a case involving treatment for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV).
Kentucky prisoner David Johnson sued Kentucky prison officials and state
agencies under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Johnson claimed that the defendants
violated his Eighth Amendment rights by denying him medical care after he
became infected with HCV. Specifically, Johnson claimed he was denied
treatment for HCV and for pain.
The U.S. District Court granted summary judgment to defendants. Johnson
appealed. The appeals court reviewed de novo.
The appeals court held that summary judgment to the prison warden and state
prison medical director was appropriate. Johnson's letters to officials
about his medical problems and his exhaustion of administrative remedies to
them "was insufficient to make them personally liable for the alleged
deprivation of treatment."
Summary judgment to the prison physician alleged to have denied medical
treatment was also appropriate. The prison doctor saw Johnson every three
or four months and checked Johnson's liver enzyme levels. A HCV medical
expert testified that it was standard practice not to biopsy the liver or
treat the HCV when liver enzyme levels were normal, which Johnson's were.
Further, Johnson's medical records provided abundant evidence that the
prison doctor did not ignore Johnson's complaints about pain. Thus, there
was no evidence that the doctor was deliberately indifferent to Johnson's
serious medical needs.
The district court grant of summary judgment was affirmed. See, Johnson v.
Million, 60 Fed.Appx. 548 (6th Cir. 2003).
judgment to defendant prison officials by the U.S. District Court, Eastern
District of Kentucky in a case involving treatment for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV).
Kentucky prisoner David Johnson sued Kentucky prison officials and state
agencies under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Johnson claimed that the defendants
violated his Eighth Amendment rights by denying him medical care after he
became infected with HCV. Specifically, Johnson claimed he was denied
treatment for HCV and for pain.
The U.S. District Court granted summary judgment to defendants. Johnson
appealed. The appeals court reviewed de novo.
The appeals court held that summary judgment to the prison warden and state
prison medical director was appropriate. Johnson's letters to officials
about his medical problems and his exhaustion of administrative remedies to
them "was insufficient to make them personally liable for the alleged
deprivation of treatment."
Summary judgment to the prison physician alleged to have denied medical
treatment was also appropriate. The prison doctor saw Johnson every three
or four months and checked Johnson's liver enzyme levels. A HCV medical
expert testified that it was standard practice not to biopsy the liver or
treat the HCV when liver enzyme levels were normal, which Johnson's were.
Further, Johnson's medical records provided abundant evidence that the
prison doctor did not ignore Johnson's complaints about pain. Thus, there
was no evidence that the doctor was deliberately indifferent to Johnson's
serious medical needs.
The district court grant of summary judgment was affirmed. See, Johnson v.
Million, 60 Fed.Appx. 548 (6th Cir. 2003).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Johnson v. Million
| Year | 2003 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 60 Fed.Appx. 548 (6th Cir. 2003) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |
| Attorney Fees | 0 |
| Damages | 0 |
| Injunction Status | N/A |
DAVID JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GEORGE MILLION, Warden; Dr. AMEJI; Dr. RICHARD KIMBLER, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-6089
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
60 Fed. Appx. 548; 2003 U.S. App.
March 7, 2003, Filed
NOTICE: [**1] NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.
PRIOR HISTORY: Eastern District of Kentucky. 01-00149. Wilhoit Jr. 08-06-02.
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.
COUNSEL: DAVID JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, Pro se, West Liberty, KY.
For GEORGE MILLION, AMEJI, RICHARD KIMBLER, Defendants - Appellees: Amy V. Barker, Office of General Counsel, Frankfort, KY.
JUDGES: Before: MARTIN, Chief Judge; ROGERS, Circuit Judge; EDMUNDS, District Judge. *
* The Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.
OPINION:
[*548] ORDER
Before: MARTIN, Chief Judge; ROGERS, Circuit Judge; EDMUNDS, District Judge. *
* The Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.
[**2]
David Johnson, a pro se Kentucky prisoner, appeals a district court judgment dismissing his civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).
Johnson filed suit against several prison officials and state agencies for violating his Eighth Amendment rights by denying medical care after he became infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) and developed various symptoms. Upon screening by the district court and the filing of an amended complaint, the case proceeded against a warden (Million), a prison physician (Ameji), and the state prison medical director (Kimbler). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants and dismissed the action on August 5, 2002.
In his timely appeal, Johnson reasserts his claim that the defendants have denied him medical treatment for HCV and for pain.
[*549] Upon de novo review, we conclude that the district court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); [**3] Harrow Prods., Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 64 F.3d 1015, 1019 (6th Cir. 1995).
The grant of summary judgment as to Million and Kimbler was proper because any notice of Johnson's problems which they may have received through the grievance system or Johnson's letters was insufficient to make them personally liable for the alleged deprivation of treatment. See Bellamy v. Bradley, 729 F.2d 416, 421 (6th Cir. 1984).
The grant of summary judgment as to Ameji was proper because he was not deliberately indifferent to any of Johnson's medical needs. A prison official exhibits deliberate indifference and thus violates the Eighth Amendment by, inter alia, intentionally denying or delaying access to medical care for serious medical needs. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104-05, 50 L. Ed. 2d 251, 97 S. Ct. 285 (1976). In their motion for summary judgment as supplemented, the defendants included copies of Johnson's medical records as well as affidavits from Ameji and an HCV expert, Dr. Shedlofsky. Ameji indicated that Johnson was seen in the prison hepatitis C clinic every three to four months and that no treatment for HCV had been provided [**4] because Johnson's liver enzyme levels (ALT) had stayed within the normal range. Shedlofsky indicated that he had reviewed Johnson's records and agreed with Ameji's assessment, and that it was "standard clinical practice not to perform liver biopsies or treat with interferon and ribavirin those Hepatitis C patients whose ALT values remain normal."
Review of Johnson's medical records also shows an absence of evidence that his complaints about pain were ignored. Ameji has repeatedly examined Johnson concerning his complaints of stomach pain and has prescribed medications, ordered blood tests, and advised Johnson concerning his diet. Johnson also has access to over-the-counter painkillers through the prison canteen.
Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed. Rule 34(j)(2)(C), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.
No. 02-6089
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
60 Fed. Appx. 548; 2003 U.S. App.
March 7, 2003, Filed
NOTICE: [**1] NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.
PRIOR HISTORY: Eastern District of Kentucky. 01-00149. Wilhoit Jr. 08-06-02.
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.
COUNSEL: DAVID JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, Pro se, West Liberty, KY.
For GEORGE MILLION, AMEJI, RICHARD KIMBLER, Defendants - Appellees: Amy V. Barker, Office of General Counsel, Frankfort, KY.
JUDGES: Before: MARTIN, Chief Judge; ROGERS, Circuit Judge; EDMUNDS, District Judge. *
* The Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.
OPINION:
[*548] ORDER
Before: MARTIN, Chief Judge; ROGERS, Circuit Judge; EDMUNDS, District Judge. *
* The Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.
[**2]
David Johnson, a pro se Kentucky prisoner, appeals a district court judgment dismissing his civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).
Johnson filed suit against several prison officials and state agencies for violating his Eighth Amendment rights by denying medical care after he became infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) and developed various symptoms. Upon screening by the district court and the filing of an amended complaint, the case proceeded against a warden (Million), a prison physician (Ameji), and the state prison medical director (Kimbler). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants and dismissed the action on August 5, 2002.
In his timely appeal, Johnson reasserts his claim that the defendants have denied him medical treatment for HCV and for pain.
[*549] Upon de novo review, we conclude that the district court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); [**3] Harrow Prods., Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 64 F.3d 1015, 1019 (6th Cir. 1995).
The grant of summary judgment as to Million and Kimbler was proper because any notice of Johnson's problems which they may have received through the grievance system or Johnson's letters was insufficient to make them personally liable for the alleged deprivation of treatment. See Bellamy v. Bradley, 729 F.2d 416, 421 (6th Cir. 1984).
The grant of summary judgment as to Ameji was proper because he was not deliberately indifferent to any of Johnson's medical needs. A prison official exhibits deliberate indifference and thus violates the Eighth Amendment by, inter alia, intentionally denying or delaying access to medical care for serious medical needs. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104-05, 50 L. Ed. 2d 251, 97 S. Ct. 285 (1976). In their motion for summary judgment as supplemented, the defendants included copies of Johnson's medical records as well as affidavits from Ameji and an HCV expert, Dr. Shedlofsky. Ameji indicated that Johnson was seen in the prison hepatitis C clinic every three to four months and that no treatment for HCV had been provided [**4] because Johnson's liver enzyme levels (ALT) had stayed within the normal range. Shedlofsky indicated that he had reviewed Johnson's records and agreed with Ameji's assessment, and that it was "standard clinical practice not to perform liver biopsies or treat with interferon and ribavirin those Hepatitis C patients whose ALT values remain normal."
Review of Johnson's medical records also shows an absence of evidence that his complaints about pain were ignored. Ameji has repeatedly examined Johnson concerning his complaints of stomach pain and has prescribed medications, ordered blood tests, and advised Johnson concerning his diet. Johnson also has access to over-the-counter painkillers through the prison canteen.
Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed. Rule 34(j)(2)(C), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.