Benjamin v. Schwartz

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that medical director was not personally involved in complained-of constitutional violation where the only allegation against him was that he “could have” intervened to encourage subordinate doctor to expedite plaintiff’s surgery because he was the doctor’s supervisor
• finding that qualified immunity was not available as a matter of law when the doctor “deliberately failed” to schedule a plaintiff for needed surgery, “knowing that excessive delay could mean permanent disability”
• denying motion to dismiss where the plaintiff alleged doctor “deliberately failed to schedule him for needed surgery for almost two years, well knowing that excessive delay could mean permanent disability” (emphasis added)
• denying motion to dismiss where the plaintiff alleged that the doctor “deliberately failed to schedule him for [a] needed [procedure] for almost two years, well knowing that excessive delay could mean permanent disability” (emphasis added)
• doctor’s alleged failure to schedule surgery in a timely manner despite definitively stating that surgery was necessary constituted deliberate indifference

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).