308 P.3d 225
Or. Ct. App.2013Background
- Plaintiff, an SRCI inmate, petitioned for habeas corpus alleging constitutionally inadequate medical treatment for fractured coccyx, knee pain, migraines, and ADHD, asserting Eighth Amendment/Or. Const. Art I, §16 violations.
- SRCI medical staff (Drs. Gulick, Elliott-Blakeslee; NP Kramer) treated plaintiff; some treatment decisions were reviewed by the Therapeutic Level of Care Committee (TLC).
- Diagnostics: x-rays and bone scans showed possible coccyx fracture/healing pelvic fracture and degenerative knee changes; TLC denied requests for stronger pain meds and surgical consult for coccyx and approved a donut cushion; bone scan was performed after referral.
- Migraines: plaintiff previously received Cafergot (preventative+abortive). After plaintiff sued Gulick, Cafergot was discontinued and Imitrex (abortive) later prescribed and dosage increased; Norvasc was tried prophylactically; effects uncertain in record.
- ADHD: Ritalin discontinued systemwide; Wellbutrin/Benadryl substituted; ADHD meds later discontinued after suspected medication abuse; plaintiff refused follow-up appointments with treating provider.
- Procedural posture: Trial court treated defendant’s motion to dismiss the habeas writ as summary judgment equivalent and granted dismissal; plaintiff appealed claiming triable issues on deliberate indifference.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deliberate indifference re: coccyx surgery refusal | TLC denied surgical consult (plaintiff alleges cost-based denial); this shows deliberate indifference | No evidence TLC denial was cost-based; replication not evidence; treatment decisions nonconstitutional | No triable issue; plaintiff produced no evidence that denial was cost-motivated or constitutionally impermissible |
| Deliberate indifference re: migraine meds (Cafergot discontinued) | Gulick discontinued effective Cafergot in retaliation for plaintiff’s prior federal suit, showing indifference | Gulick denies retaliatory motive; by adjudication time treatment had been adjusted (increased Imitrex, prophylactic Norvasc) | Past retaliation inference insufficient; current treatment responsive; no ongoing deliberate indifference shown |
| Deliberate indifference re: knee pain treatment | Denial/limited pain meds left plaintiff inadequately treated | Medical staff increased NSAID/analgesic dosages and ordered imaging; records show responsiveness | No triable issue: records show responsive, continuing treatment at adjudication time |
| Deliberate indifference re: ADHD medication discontinuation | Substituted or discontinued meds worsened condition; shows deliberate indifference | Meds discontinued after suspected abuse; plaintiff refused follow-up evaluations so providers lacked evidence of harm | No triable issue: plaintiff refused to cooperate with treatment review; no evidence of ongoing constitutional deprivation |
Key Cases Cited
- McClintock v. Schiedler, 123 Or. App. 334 (summary-judgment standard for dismissing habeas writ)
- Billings v. Gates, 323 Or. 167 (adopts Estelle deliberate-indifference standard under Or. Const. Art I, §16)
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference standard for prisoner medical care)
- Herbert v. Altimeter, Inc., 230 Or. App. 715 (circumstantial evidence may show retaliatory motive)