Case Name: John M. HARRIS, Appellant, v. CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES; Defendant, Shirley Crawford, Nurse, East Arkansas Regional Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; Appellee, Duong Ly, Dr., originally sued as Ly, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-05-29
Citations: 225 F. App'x 411
Docket Number: No. 05-4082
Parties: John M. HARRIS, Appellant, v. CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES; Defendant, Shirley Crawford, Nurse, East Arkansas Regional Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; Appellee, Duong Ly, Dr., originally sued as Ly, Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 225
Pages: 411–412

Head Matter:
John M. HARRIS, Appellant, v. CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES; Defendant, Shirley Crawford, Nurse, East Arkansas Regional Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; Appellee, Duong Ly, Dr., originally sued as Ly, Defendant.
No. 05-4082.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: May 22, 2007.
Filed: May 29, 2007.
John M. Harris, Dermott, AR, pro se.
Michelle Banks Odum, Humphries & Lewis, White Hall, AR, for Appellee.
Before COLLOTON, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Arkansas inmate John Harris appeals the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action following an eviden-tiary 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, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994); Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 36, 113 S.Ct. 2475, 125 L.Ed.2d 22 (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, 97 S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976).
Accordingly, we affirm.
. 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.