Duckworth v. Ahmad

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that doctor who knew there was risk of cancer but erroneously thought that another condition was more likely causing prisoner’s symptoms was not deliberately indifferent
• concluding that doctor was not subjectively indif‐ ferent to risk of cancer when inmate showed no evidence doctor thought cancer was possible, doctor performed ad‐ vanced testing, and inmate had no symptoms indicative of cancer
• holding that a doctor’s failure to order a cystoscopy, which delayed diagnosis of the inmate’s bladder cancer, did not amount to deliberate indifference because the misdiagnosis and treatment efforts still were based on reasonable medical judgment
• holding there was no deliberate indifference even when “the benefit of hindsight” revealed “a better route” of treatment
• noting that Dr. Kayira ordered “more advanced testing” as Duckworth’s condition worsened
• stating “if this comes back clear, I don’t want to hear no more out of you” did not evidence deliberate indifference when doctor continued to provide care to prisoner

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).