Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02418/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02418-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Correctional Medical Services
Appellee
Maurice B. Madison-Bey
Appellant

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Michael J. Davis, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Raymond

L. Erickson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2418

___________

Maurice B. Madison-Bey, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Correctional Medical Services, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: May 5, 2006

Filed: May 11, 2006 

___________

Before RILEY, MAGILL, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Minnesota state prisoner Maurice Madison-Bey appeals the district court’s1

 28

U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) preservice dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against

Correctional Medical Services (CMS) for deliberate indifference to his medical needs.

Madison-Bey has moved for appointment of counsel. 

Appellate Case: 05-2418 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/11/2006 Entry ID: 2043668
-2-

After careful review of the record, see Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783

(8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (de novo review),we agree with the district court that the

complaint failed, because Madison-Bey did not allege that he suffered harm as a result

of an unconstitutional policy or custom of CMS, the sole named defendant, see Burke

v. N.D. Dep’t of Corr. & Rehab., 294 F.3d 1043, 1044 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam)

(corporation acting under color of state law may be liable only if policy, custom, or

action by those who represent official policy inflicts injury actionable under § 1983).

Further, Madison-Bey’s request to amend his complaint to add individual CMS

personnel as defendants was futile, because his allegations amounted to mere

disagreement with the course of his treatment and at most described negligence, which

is insufficient to state a claim for deliberate indifference. See Dulany v. Carnahan,

132 F.3d 1234, 1239 (inmates have no constitutional right to particular course of

treatment, and doctors are free to use their own medical judgment; mere negligence

or medical malpractice is insufficient to rise to constitutional violation).

Accordingly, we affirm, and we deny Madison-Bey’s motion for appointment

of counsel and decline to consider his numerous other requests submitted for the first

time on appeal. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-2418 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/11/2006 Entry ID: 2043668