Glenn S. Matthews v. Stephen Palte, No. 07-13285 (11th Cir. 2008)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JUNE 20, 2008 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK No. 07-13285 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D. C. Docket No. 07-00702-CV-TCB-1 GLEN S. MATTHEWS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus STEPHEN PALTE, GONZALEZ, JOHN DOE, I, Defendants-Appellees. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _________________________ (June 20, 2008) Before ANDERSON, HULL and PRYOR, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Glenn Matthews, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the dismissal sua sponte of his complaint that Dr. Stephen Palte, physician s assistant Gonzalez, and an unknown dermatologist violated his civil rights under the Eighth Amendment. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Matthews argues that he stated a claim that prison officials were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs because they misdiagnosed and mistreated his psoriasis. We affirm. A district court is required to dismiss a prisoner s complaint against an official if the complaint is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(a), (b)(1). We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim and accept as true the allegations in the complaint. Leal v. Ga. Dep t of Corr., 254 F.3d 1276, 1278 79 (11th Cir. 2001). To state a claim of deliberate indifference for medical mistreatment under the Eighth Amendment, an inmate must allege that officials have made an omission[] sufficiently harmful to evidence deliberate indifference to [the inmate s] serious medical needs. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106, 97 S. Ct. 285, 292 (1976). The inmate must satisfy both an objective and a subjective inquiry. Farrow v. West, 320 F.3d 1235, 1243 (11th Cir. 2003). Under the objective inquiry, the inmate must allege that he has been diagnosed with or obviously exhibits a serious medical condition that, if not treated, pos[es] a 2 substantial risk of serious harm, and his treatment was so inadequate that it constituted an unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain. Id. (quoting Taylor v. Adams, 221 F.3d 1254, 1258 (11th Cir. 2000) (internal quotation marks omitted)). Under the subjective inquiry, the inmate must allege that the prison official knew of the risk of harm and deliberately delayed or denied treatment. Id. at 1245. Even if we assume that psoriasis is a serious medical condition, Matthews s complaint that his condition was misdiagnosed as spider bites and mistreated with steroid creams does not state a claim of deliberate indifference. Matthews s allegations of misdiagnosis and inadequate treatment involve no more than medical negligence. Farrow, 320 F.3d at 1245. Matthews alleges that his condition more recently has been correctly diagnosed by a dermatologist as psoriasis. Matthews also has received regular treatment for his psoriasis, which the exhibits to Matthews s complaint establish is an incurable and chronic condition. The district court did not err when it dismissed Matthew s complaint for failure to state a claim. The dismissal of Matthews s complaint is AFFIRMED. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
