Floyd L. Roberson v. Bill Bradshaw

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that prison official and 25 doctor violated Eighth Amendment by delaying diabetic’s doctor visit and keeping inmate on medication despite complaints about adverse reactions, respectively
• holding that “requiring [county] inmates to pay for their own medications if they can afford to do so . . . is not a federal constitutional violation.”
• explaining that medical need or deprivation alleged must be “either obvious to the layperson or supported by medical evidence like a physician diagnosis”
• concluding it is not a federal constitutional violation to require inmates to pay for their own medications if they can afford to do so
• finding that neither negligence nor medical malpractice are sufficient to rise to an Eighth Amendment violation
• describing the deputy’s knowledge of inmate’s diabetes and complaints in determining whether inmate suffered from medical condition obvious to a layperson

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).