Joni Zaya v. Kul Sood, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 16374

Background

Inmate Joni Zaya broke his left distal radius (wrist) while at Henry Hill Correctional Center and was seen by prison physician Dr. Kul B. Sood, who referred him to orthopedic surgeon Dr. Kenneth Bussey.
Dr. Bussey placed Zaya in a long-arm cast and instructed a follow-up visit with repeat x-rays in three weeks, explaining earlier intervention would be easier if displacement occurred.
Dr. Sood acknowledged receipt of Bussey’s written instructions but waited nearly seven weeks to schedule the follow-up; pain meds and a cast modification were provided in the interim.
When finally x-rayed, Zaya’s fracture had healed at an improper angle; he underwent two surgeries (re-break and plate insertion, later plate removal).
Zaya sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference; the district court granted summary judgment for Dr. Sood concluding the delay reflected a difference of medical opinion.
The Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded, finding a triable issue whether Dr. Sood disregarded rather than merely disagreed with the specialist’s instructions.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Dr. Sood was deliberately indifferent by delaying the specialist follow-up	Zaya: Sood ignored Bussey’s three-week return instruction and the known risk of worsening displacement, showing conscious disregard	Sood: He exercised medical judgment and reasonably disagreed with Bussey; three weeks is too early to assess healing	Reversed: jury could infer conscious disregard from ignoring specialist instructions received contemporaneously, creating a genuine issue of fact
Whether a difference of medical opinion precludes Eighth Amendment liability	Zaya: Not when evidence shows ignoring instructions rather than a good-faith disagreement	Sood: Disagreement among physicians is common and defeats deliberate-indifference claims	Court: A mere difference of opinion is insufficient, but evidence that the defendant disregarded (ignored) the specialist’s recommendation can survive summary judgment
Whether expert testimony showing deviation from standard of care establishes deliberate indifference	Zaya: Expert Evans opined that a generalist should follow the orthopedist’s three-week plan; this supports an inference Sood didn’t truly disagree	Sood: Expert opinions about negligence don’t prove subjective culpability	Court: Expert opinion combined with evidence that Sood knew the risks creates a triable issue on subjective intent
Whether qualified immunity shields Sood (as a private prison contractor employee)	Zaya: If Sood consciously disregarded known risk, conduct violated clearly established Eighth Amendment law	Sood: Entitled to qualified immunity	Court: Even if immunity applied, it would not entitle Sood to summary judgment because the law on deliberate indifference is clearly established; also Richardson controls that private employees lack qualified immunity

Key Cases Cited

Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to serious medical needs)
Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (subjective knowledge and disregard standard for deliberate indifference)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment / genuine dispute standard)
Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (qualified immunity framework)
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (objective reasonableness for qualified immunity)
Gil v. Reed, 381 F.3d 649 (inference of conscious disregard from ignoring specialist warnings)
Jones v. Simek, 193 F.3d 485 (specialist’s instructions can support inference of defendant’s knowledge)
Pyles v. Fahim, 771 F.3d 403 (departure from accepted professional practice can support inference of lack of professional judgment)
Duckworth v. Ahmad, 532 F.3d 675 (expert opinion about negligence insufficient alone to show subjective intent)
Greeno v. Daley, 414 F.3d 645 (difference of medical opinion generally insufficient for deliberate-indifference liability)