Printer Friendly
The Free Library
14,800,105 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

Dellairo v. Garland.


U.S. District Court

FAILURE TO PROVIDE CARE

DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE

Dellairo v. Garland Garland, city (1990 pop. 180,650), Dallas co., N Tex., a suburb of Dallas; inc. 1891. Since World War II, Garland has grown from an agricultural community into an important center for electronics research and for the production of electronic equipment. , 222 F.Supp.2d 86 (D.Me. 2002). An inmate INMATE. One who dwells in a part of another's house, the latter dwelling, at the same time, in the said house. Kitch. 45, b; Com. Dig. Justices of the Peace, B 85; 1 B. & Cr. 578; 8 E. C. L. R. 153; 2 Dowl. & Ry. 743; 8 B. & Cr. 71; 15 E. C. L. R. 154; 2 Man. & Ry. 227; 9 B. & Cr.  who was serving a nine month jail sentence jail sentence jail npeine f de prison  filed a pro se and in forma pauperis [Latin, In the character or manner of a pauper.] A phrase that indicates the permission given by a court to an indigent to initiate a legal action without having to pay for court fees or costs due to his or her lack of financial resources.  [section] 1983 suit against the jail's physician's assistant physician's assistant: see physician assistant. . The district court denied the assistant's motion to dismiss. The court held that the inmate sufficiently alleged a serious deprivation and alleged that the assistant had been deliberately indifferent. The court found that the assistant was not immune to the inmate's [section] 1983 claim. Prior to the inmate's admission to the jail, he was diagnosed with an ankle growth and was scheduled for surgery because an emergency room physician was concerned that the growth was growing into the bone. The inmate was in constant pain and the level of pain increased as he went untreated in Jail for over seven months, even though the inmate made regular complaints to the physician's assistant. No treatment was provided, even though a second set of x-rays reconfirmed the presence of the growth. (Penobscot County Jail, Maine)
COPYRIGHT 2003 CRS, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2003, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:deliberate indifference to medical needs
Publication:Corrections Caselaw Quarterly
Article Type:Brief Article
Geographic Code:1U1ME
Date:May 1, 2003
Words:180
Previous Article:Davis v. New York.(MEDICAL CARE)(Brief Article)
Next Article:Estate of Hampton v. Androscoggin County.(MEDICAL CARE)(Brief Article)
Topics:



Related Articles
U.S. Appeals Court: SUICIDE.(Brief Article)
Lindsay v. Dunleavy.(MEDICAL CARE)(case regarding lack of medical care)(Brief Article)
Adames v. Perez.(FAILURE TO PROTECT)(deliberate indifference to the inmate's safety)(Brief Article)
Carter v. Galloway.(deliberate indifference and prisoner abuse)(Brief Article)
Lavender v. Lampert.(MEDICAL CARE)(deliberate indifference to medical needs)(Brief Article)
Farrow v. West.(MEDICAL CARE)(deliberate indifference to medical need)(Brief Article)
Rivera v. Alvarado.(MEDICAL CARE)(violation of United States Constitution. 8th Amendment)(Brief Article)
Jones v. Edguardo A. Consuegra's Estate.(MEDICAL CARE)(Brief Article)
Dowty v. Tarrell.(Dowty v. Tarrell, 368 F.Supp.2d 1024)(Brief Article)
Miller v. Calhoun County.(Miller v. Calhoun County, 408 F.3d 803)(Brief Article)

Terms of use | Copyright © 2010 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles