Opinion ID: 579987
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Inadequate Supervision and Treatment of Injuries

Text: 42 Sivard contends that the county's delayed reaction to Lewis's suicide, its delay in affording him medical aid, and the alleged misdiagnosis by the doctor whom the county provided for his care were injuries for which the United State Constitution, through § 1983, offers him recovery. The district court, and we, disagree. We hold that his claims are not cognizable under the Constitution. 43 This Court has already determined that even a negligent delay in seeking medical treatment does not show deliberate indifference to an inmate's constitutional rights. 20 A § 1983 claim must be based on deliberate indifference, not on mere inadvertence. 21 If any claim resulting from deliberate indifference arose from Darryl Lewis's attempted suicide in jail, it belongs to Lewis, not to Harold Sivard. Failure to respond to a suicide attempt, even if the jailors of Pulaski County did fail to respond, is not an injury inflicted deliberately on the apparent savior of the attempted suicide. Sivard does not allege that the deputies of the Pulaski County Jail knew that he had been injured in Lewis's suicide attempt before they arrived at his cell. He does not allege any action by those officials that would rise to the level of deliberate indifference to his constitutional rights. 44 Sivard contends that Dr. Allman's treatment of his injury was so insufficient as to constitute no treatment at all; we agree with the district court's dismissal of that contention. Sivard does not allege that Dr. Allman ignored his injuries; his claim against Dr. Allman is one of simple malpractice. Simple malpractice does not create a claim for relief under the Eighth Amendment. 22 Sivard has alleged no material facts that would confer on him a cause of action under the Constitution for his injuries. The defendants were entitled to a summary judgment on these claims as a matter of law.