Opinion ID: 2562586
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Hertz's partial denture

Text: An inmate's need for properly fitting dentures might amount to a serious need when, lacking them, the inmate suffers disfigurement, inability to eat and consequent weight loss, or great pain. In Hunt v. Dental Department the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an inmate stated a claim of deliberate indifference when he alleged that prison officials were aware of his bleeding gums, breaking teeth and his inability to eat properly, yet failed to take any action to relieve his pain. [20] In Farrow v. West the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment in favor of a prison dentist after concluding an inmate had demonstrated a serious medical need through evidence show[ing] pain, continual bleeding and swollen gums, two remaining teeth slicing into gums, weight loss, and such continuing medical problems. [21] Hertz did not lack dentures, but complained that his upper partial denture fit loosely. He did not produce any evidence that the loose-fitting denture caused him to lose weight, bleed, suffer lacerations, or suffer additional dental damage. In medical requests from May to September 2005, he complained that the denture was bruising the roof of his mouth. In contrast to the conditions described in Hunt and Farrow, the bruising Hertz describes is not, without more, the kind of chronic and substantial pain or injury that implicates the Eighth Amendment. We affirm the superior court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants on this claim of deliberate indifference.