Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-04082/USCOURTS-ca8-05-04082-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Correctional Medical Services
Not Party
Shirley Crawford
Appellee
John M. Harris
Appellant
Duong Ly
Not Party

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-4082

___________

John M. Harris, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Eastern

* District of Arkansas.

Correctional Medical Services; *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Defendant, *

*

Shirley Crawford, Nurse, East *

Arkansas Regional Unit, Arkansas *

Department of Correction; *

*

Appellee, *

*

Duong Ly, Dr., originally sued as Ly, *

*

Defendant. *

___________

Submitted: May 22, 2007

Filed: May 29, 2007

___________

Before COLLOTON, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 05-4082 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/29/2007 Entry ID: 3313583
1

The Honorable William R. Wilson, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable

Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of

Arkansas.

-2-

Arkansas inmate John Harris appeals the district court’s1

 dismissal of his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 action following an evidentiary hearing. Because Harris did not make

a jury demand, we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error and its

conclusions of law de novo. See Choate v. Lockhart, 7 F.3d 1370, 1373 & n.1 (8th

Cir. 1993). Harris claimed that Nurse Shirley Crawford was deliberately indifferent

to his serious medical need when she administered a TB skin-injection test to him,

even though she knew he would have a positive reaction, and that she did not properly

treat his arm in the days following the injection. He claimed that his arm became

swollen, red, and painful, and that he has a permanent scar from the injection. We

agree with the district court that Harris did not show the TB test posed a substantial

risk of serious harm, see Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 832-33, 837 (1994);

Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 36 (1993), and that Harris did not show Crawford

denied him proper treatment in the days following the injection, see Estelle v. Gamble,

429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976).

Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-4082 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/29/2007 Entry ID: 3313583