Salvatore Chimenti, a Pennsylvania state prisoner, was taken off his medication for Hepatitis C and made to wait over two years for a new drug, even though it had been approved for use six months earlier. In 2003 he sued prison doctors in federal district court, claiming they had been deliberately indifferent to his medical needs in violation of the 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The district court dismissed the case under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) without allowing Chimenti to amend his complaint.
On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit found that dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) is only appropriate if the complaint fails to allege any viable claim. It then held that the alleged delay in Chimenti's treatment was sufficient to withstand a Rule 12(b)(6) challenge. The case was reversed and remanded with instructions for the district court to allow Chimenti to amend his complaint if necessary. See: Chimenti v. Kimber, 133 Fed.Appx. 833 (3rd Cir. 2005).
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
Chimenti v. Kimber
|Cite||133 Fed.Appx. 833 (3d Cir. 2005)|
|Level||Court of Appeals|