Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

8th Amendment – Deliberate Indifference

By: Derek Hawkins//October 14, 2019//

8th Amendment – Deliberate Indifference

By: Derek Hawkins//October 14, 2019//

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Dennis Davis v. Francis Kayira

Case No.: 18-2456

Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and FLAUM and SYKES, Circuit Judges.

Focus: 8th Amendment – Deliberate Indifference

Dennis Davis is an Illinois prisoner suffering from kidney disease. After receiving dialysis on a Saturday morning, he told a prison nurse that his mind was fuzzy and his body was weak. Both complaints were similar to side effects he had experienced in the past after dialysis. The nurse called Dr. Francis Kayira, the prison’s medical director, who was on call. The doctor asked her whether Davis had asymmetrical grip strength, facial droop, or was drooling—all classic signs of a stroke. When she said “no,” Dr. Kayira determined that Davis was experiencing the same dialysis-related side effects as before rather than something more serious. He told the nurse to monitor the problem and call him if the symptoms got worse. Dr. Kayira didn’t hear anything else for the rest of the weekend, but on Monday morning he examined Davis and discovered that he had in fact suffered a stroke.

Davis later sued Dr. Kayira, alleging that he acted with deliberate indifference to his medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Davis also raised a state-law medical-malpractice claim. The district court entered summary judgment for Dr. Kayira on both claims. The judge ruled that the deliberate-indifference claim failed because there is no evidence that Dr. Kayira was aware of symptoms suggesting that Davis was suffering a stroke. And the statelaw claim failed because Davis lacked expert testimony about the appropriate standard of care. A magistrate judge had blocked Davis’s sole expert because he wasn’t disclosed in time, and Davis never objected to that ruling before the district court.

We affirm. Davis lacks evidence of deliberate indifference. And because he did not ask the district court to review the magistrate judge’s exclusion of his expert, his state-law claim fails as well.

Affirmed

Full Text


Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests