Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-02208/USCOURTS-ca10-89-02208-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

RALPH RODNEY EARNEST, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

DONALD DORSEY, MAJOR ARCHULETA, CAPTAIN) 

FLOWERS, ANDRES STEWART, FRANK VILLEGAS,) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before MOORE, BRORBY and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

FILED 

United Stam ~,, '!f Appeals 'tenth C1:::cu1t 

MAY 211990 . 

&OBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 89-2208 

(D. New Mexico) 

(CIV-89-0853-JC) 

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this 

three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argument 

would not be of material assistance in the determination of this 

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The 

cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-2208 Document: 01019970242 Date Filed: 05/21/1990 Page: 1 
Mr. Earnest appeals the dismissal of his pro se S 1983 

complaint. We affirm. 

Mr. Earnest, a state inmate confined at the Southern New 

Mexico Correctional Facility at Las Cruces, New Mexico, filed his 

complaint against the penitentiary, its warden, and four other 

individuals who are apparently correctional officers. 

pertinent portions of the complaint read as follows: 

I was diagnosed with blood in my urine and was to be 

sent downtown for further diagnosis ••.• When 

Officer Stewart came to take me downtown he gave me an 

unlawful and illegal order to tuck my shirt in ••. I 

refused and was subsequently told that I would be denied 

medical treatment if I failed to tuck my shirt in. 

The 

The trial court dismissed the complaint, directing that it 

not be served, stating: 

Plaintiff claims that he was denied medical 

treatment in violation of his constitutional rights. 

The material allegations of the Complaint reveal that 

the Plaintiff suffered pain The prison infirmary 

obtained a urine sample which revealed blood. Plaintiff 

was immediately made ready to be transported for an xray. Plaintiff was told to tuck in his shirt tail and 

refused •••• The Complaint does not have any further 

relevant allegations of later events. 

Since there are no factual allegations that 

Plaintiff sustained any physical injury as a result of 

the alleged lack of an x-ray, he does not state a claim 

for relief under 42 U.S.C. S 1983. 

Mr. Earnest argues on appeal that a complaint should not be 

dismissed unless it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove 

no set of facts which would entitle him to relief and argues that 

prose plaintiffs should be held to less stringent standards. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-2208 Document: 01019970242 Date Filed: 05/21/1990 Page: 2 
In order to constitute a justiciable claim by a prison inmate 

under 42 U.S.C. S 1983 for alleged deprivation of medical care or 

treatment there must be shown "deliberate indifference to serious 

medical needs" of the prisoner. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S . 97, 

106 (1976). The Sixth Circuit has defined the standard under the 

following test: acute physical condition; urgent need for medical 

care; failure or refusal to provide it; and tangible residual 

injury. Westlake v. Lucas, 537 F.2d 857, 859 (6th Cir. 1976). In 

Meade v. Grubbs, 841 F.2d 1512, 1530 (10th Cir. 1988), we referred 

only to the "deliberate indifference" standard of Estelle. Even 

so, Earnest fails to state a claim. See also Rock v. McCoy, 763 

F.2d 394, 397 (10th Cir. 1985) (the standard under S 1983 is 

"deliberate indifference" to serious medical need). 

The decision of the district court is AFFIRMED and the 

mandate shall issue forthwith. 

Entered for the Court: 

WADE BRORBY 

United States Circuit Judge 

-3-

Appellate Case: 89-2208 Document: 01019970242 Date Filed: 05/21/1990 Page: 3