Nelson v. State of California

How courts have described this case

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

• holding any failure to “provide necessary medication or treatment” 23 once “summoned,” “cannot be characterized as a failure to summon medical care”
• distinguishing violation of California Government Code § 845.6 from tort of medical malpractice
• affirming State’s demurrer against § 2 845.6 claim where plaintiff’s claim “does not recite that his injury was the result of a failure on the 3 part of any employee to summon immediate and competent medical care[.]”
• “Failure of a practitioner to prescribe or provide necessary medication or treatment . . . is . . . medical malpractice . . . [but] cannot be characterized as a failure to summon medical care.”
• “Once a practitioner has 27 been summoned to examine and treat a prisoner, he or she is under a duty to exercise that 28 degree of diligence, care, and skill such as is ordinarily possessed by other members of the 1 profession. Failure to do so is malpractice.”
• “[F]ailure of a practitioner to prescribe or 10 provide necessary medication or treatment . . . is . . . medical malpractice and clearly, as a 11 matter of the plain meaning of the statutory language, cannot be characterized as a failure 12 to summon medical care.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).