UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Christopher Palermo

v. Civil No. 08-cv-109-JL

Robert Soucy

O R D E R

In this prisoner civil rights action, Christopher Palermo,

proceeding pro se, sued the Coos County House of Corrections, its

superintendent, and a doctor and nurse who practice at the

facility, alleging a number of constitutional violations that

occurred during one of his stints as a pretrial detainee there. 

See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Following initial review, see 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915A; L.R. 4.3(d)(2), the magistrate judge recommended

dismissal of the action except insofar as it alleged a claim

against the superintendent for retaliatory transfers to other

facilities, and a claim against the doctor and nurse for

deliberate indifference to Palermo’s serious medical needs in

their treatment of a blood blister that became infected and

ultimately required surgery.

This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal

question) because, as the magistrate judge recognized, deliberate

indifference to the serious medical needs of a pretrial detainee

Case 1:08-cv-00109-JL Document 45 Filed 07/15/09 Page 1 of 6
2

amounts to a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. See Mahan v.

Plymouth County House of Corrs., 64 F.3d 14, 17 (1st Cir. 1995).

Palermo has since voluntarily dismissed his claims against

the superintendent and the nurse. The sole remaining defendant,

Dr. Robert Soucy, has moved for summary judgment on the claim

against him. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. Palermo has not responded

to the motion. As explained below, the motion is granted due to

the complete lack of evidence that Dr. Soucy was deliberately

indifferent to Palermo’s serious medical needs. 

Though Palermo has not filed any response to Soucy’s motion,

that does not affect the standard of review: the court still

“must assure itself that the moving party’s submission shows that

‘there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the

moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law’” in

order to grant summary judgment. NEPSK, Inc. v. Town of Houlton,

283 F.3d 1, 7 (1st Cir. 2002) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)). 

But it does mean, under this court’s Local Rules, that “[a]ll

properly supported material facts in the moving party’s factual

statement shall be deemed admitted,” since they were not

“properly opposed by the adverse party.” L.R. 7.2(b)(2). While

those facts are set forth below, the court has also taken note of

the allegations of Palermo’s complaint, as construed by the

magistrate judge in his report and recommendation.

Case 1:08-cv-00109-JL Document 45 Filed 07/15/09 Page 2 of 6
Though Dr. Soucy explains that Palermo was actually 1

suffering from an ingrown hair, the court has simply accepted

Palermo’s account that he had a blood blister, because it makes

no difference to the outcome here.

3

At one point during Palermo’s stay at the Coos County House

of Corrections, he went to the defendant nurse complaining of a

blood blister on his thigh. The nurse told him, he alleges, 1

“Pop it yourself. I don’t want nothing to do with it.” To this

end, she provided him with a needle, rubbing alcohol, hydrogen

peroxide, rubber gloves, and a roll of toilet paper, and left him

in a holding cell under the watch of a corrections officer. 

After attempting to lance the blister by sticking himself with

the needle for fifteen minutes, Palermo was returned to his own

cell. This occurred without any consultation by Dr. Soucy, who

maintains, as one would hope, that “he would have advised against

giving an inmate a sharp instrument” for this purpose, due to the

risk of infection (among other reasons, presumably).

The next day, the resulting wound on Palermo’s thigh was

“hot and tender to the touch,” so Dr. Soucy ordered antibiotics. 

Though the infection soon disappeared, a “lump” remained; Dr.

Soucy, with Palermo’s consent, later excised the lump in a

procedure performed outside the jail, at a hospital. The

procedure required a small incision, about 2.5 centimeters long,

which Dr. Soucy closed with 5 sutures.

Case 1:08-cv-00109-JL Document 45 Filed 07/15/09 Page 3 of 6
Palermo also alleges that a prison nurse told him, on the 2

day before the wound reopened, that “the stitches had been left

in for several days longer than they should have been.”

4

After the surgical wound showed no signs of infection for

two days, Dr. Soucy informed Palermo that the stitches would be

removed the following week. Palermo, though, insisted that Dr.

Soucy wait several additional days, until after a scheduled court

appearance that Palermo believed would result in his release from

jail. But things did not turn out that way.

After the hearing, Palermo was not released, but returned to

the Coos County House of Corrections. During the trip, the wound

reopened, “soaking his boxer shorts in blood and causing [him] to

experience a great deal of pain.” Palermo received treatment

from a nurse at the jail, who, he alleges, told him “she was

surprised that no internal stitches had been used” on “a wound of

that size,” and that “internal stitches would have prevented the

reopening.” On Dr. Soucy’s orders, the nurse simply dressed the 2

wound--no additional suturing was ordered--which healed fully

within a few weeks. Palermo alleges, though, that “he is in

constant pain since the wound reopened, which makes it difficult

for him to walk, stand, or sleep,” and that “he has been

permanently disfigured as he has a large ‘hole’ in his leg near

his groin” from the wound.

Case 1:08-cv-00109-JL Document 45 Filed 07/15/09 Page 4 of 6
5

“For medical treatment in prison to offend the Constitution,

the care must involve acts or omissions sufficiently harmful to

evidence deliberate indifference to serious medical needs . . . . 

Therefore, substandard care, malpractice, negligence, inadvertent

failure to provide care, and disagreement as to the appropriate

course of treatment are all insufficient to prove a

constitutional violation.” Ruiz-Rosa v. Rullan, 485 F.3d 150,

156 (1st Cir. 2007). There is simply no evidence that Palermo’s

treatment by Dr. Soucy--as opposed to his treatment by the nurse

who, without Dr. Soucy’s knowledge or authorization, instructed

Palermo to attempt to lance the blister with a needle provided

for that purpose--even rose to the level of negligence, let alone

deliberate indifference. Dr. Soucy promptly, and successfully,

treated the infection that resulted from Palermo’s attempt at

self-surgery. He also successfully removed the cyst that

remained, at a time of Palermo’s choosing. The only complication

that eventually arose was when the stitches reopened. But there

is no evidence to suggest that occurred because of any omission,

let alone deliberate indifference, on the part of Dr. Soucy.

The result is the same even if the allegations of Palermo’s

complaint are accepted as competent proof, notwithstanding Rule

56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 501 of the

Federal Rules of Evidence, which qualifies Palermo’s account of

Case 1:08-cv-00109-JL Document 45 Filed 07/15/09 Page 5 of 6
document no. 43. 3

6

the nurses’ statements about the stitches as inadmissible

hearsay. At most, the nurses’ alleged criticism of how long the

stitches were left in, or which kinds of stitches were used,

establishes a disagreement with “the course of treatment Dr.

[Soucy] provided, which . . . is insufficient to show deliberate

indifference.” Ruiz-Rosa, 485 F.3d at 156. So the complaint

arguably does not even state a claim against Dr. Soucy for

deliberate indifference to Palermo’s serious medical needs but,

that shortcoming aside, Palermo unquestionably cannot provide any

evidence to support such a claim.

Dr. Soucy’s motion for summary judgment is therefore

GRANTED. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close 3

the case. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: July 15, 2009

cc: Christopher Palermo, pro se

Jonathan A. Lax, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00109-JL Document 45 Filed 07/15/09 Page 6 of 6