From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Sotelo

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 29, 2008
295 F. App'x 208 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 07-15149.

Submitted September 8, 2008.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed September 29, 2008.

Gerry Williams, Soledad, CA, pro se.

Jason Toji Calabro, Esq., Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver Hedges, LLP, San Francisco, CA, Daniel H. Bromberg, Esq., Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver Hedges, LLP, Redwood Shores, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Barbara N. Sutliffe, Esq., Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Susan Yvonne Illston, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-04-02409-SI.

Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. 36-3.


Gerry Williams, a California state prisoner, appeals from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison guards violated his Eighth Amendment rights by acting with deliberate indifference to his medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Balint v. Carson City, 180 F.3d 1047, 1050 (9th Cir. 1999). We vacate and remand.

The district court concluded that Williams failed to raise a triable issue as to whether the alleged delay by defendants Tuntakit and Roach in calling for medical assistance was the actual and proximate cause of Williams's pain. However, the record shows that the pain subsided only after Williams was administered treatments in addition to nitroglycerin tablets. Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to Williams, a reasonable jury could conclude the prison guards' inaction caused Williams to suffer a constitutional injury. See McGuckin v. Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1059 (9th Cir. 1992) (stating that the "unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain" constitutes a violation of the Eighth Amendment), rev'd on other grounds, WMX Tech., Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 1997).

Accordingly, we vacate the judgment and remand to the district court for further proceedings.

Each party shall bear its own costs.

VACATED and REMANDED.


Summaries of

Williams v. Sotelo

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 29, 2008
295 F. App'x 208 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

Williams v. Sotelo

Case Details

Full title:Gerry WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A. SOTELO; et al.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Sep 29, 2008

Citations

295 F. App'x 208 (9th Cir. 2008)

Citing Cases

Rood v. Lockwood

Prolonging plaintiff's pain by delaying his treatment can constitute harm. See Meador v. Hammer, No.…

Meador v. Hammer

However, on appeal, the Ninth Circuit vacated the district court's judgment, finding that because the record…