Date: May 5th, 2016 11:13 AM
Author: thriller kitchen police squad
I do not say that Hamby showed deliberate indifference
as a matter of law and could receive summary relief himself.
But his evidence was sufficient to raise a genuine issue of
material fact on whether “the course of treatment the doctors
chose was medically unacceptable under the circumstances,”
and whether they “chose this course in conscious disregard of
an excessive risk” to Hamby’s health. Jackson, 90 F.3d at
332. This case should have gone to a jury as the trier of fact,
with the guidance of correct jury instructions on deliberate
indifference. It should not have been resolved by summary
judgment of the district court. See Snow, 681 F.3d at 987.
Nor should that summary judgment be affirmed by us. And
so I dissent in the hope that a future court may correct the
majority’s error
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/05/02/15-35283.pdf
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3215007&forum_id=2#30413035)