Wilhelm v. Rotman, et al., No. 11-16335 (9th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff appealed the dismissal of his pro se complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983, against certain prison medical providers, alleging that the providers' delay in treating his hernia amounted to deliberate indifference to his medical needs, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The court held that plaintiff voluntarily consented to the jurisdiction of any magistrate judge, including the one who decided his case; the allegations against Dr. Schuster could not support a deliberate indifference claim because they amount to a claim of negligence; and the allegations against Dr. Rotman were sufficient to warrant ordering him to file an answer. Accordingly, the court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded in part.
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.