Mandrey Davis v. Captain Hilborn , 632 F. App'x 148 ( 2016 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7356
MANDREY D. DAVIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAPTAIN HILBORN; VICKI HARDING; JANE DOE; JOHN DOE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:14-ct-03324-F)
Submitted: January 29, 2016 Decided: February 8, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mandrey D. Davis, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mandrey D. Davis, a North Carolina prisoner, appeals the
district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012)
complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)
(2012). Davis alleged that prison officials were deliberately
indifferent to his serious medical needs. The district court
concluded that Davis’ allegations were frivolous because he
simply disagreed with the course of treatment provided by prison
officials. We vacate and remand for further proceedings. ∗
A federal court is required to dismiss an in forma pauperis
complaint at any time the court determines the action “is
frivolous or malicious . . . fails to state a claim on which
relief may be granted[,] or . . . seeks monetary relief against
a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B). A complaint is frivolous if “it lacks an
arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams,
490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). We review for abuse of discretion the
dismissal of a complaint as frivolous under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
Nagy v. FMC Butner, 376 F.3d 252, 254 (4th Cir. 2004). “An
error of law or clear error in finding of fact is an abuse of
∗We express no opinion as to the merits of Davis’ claims,
concluding only that the claims were prematurely dismissed.
2
discretion.” Berry v. Schulman, 807 F.3d 600, 608 (4th Cir.
2015).
“A prison official’s deliberate indifference to an inmate’s
serious medical needs constitutes cruel and unusual punishment
under the Eighth Amendment.” Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170,
178 (4th Cir. 2014). To state a claim for medical mistreatment
under § 1983, a prisoner must plausibly allege that his medical
condition was objectively sufficiently serious and that the
prison official acted with deliberate indifference. Id. “An
official is deliberately indifferent to an inmate’s serious
medical needs only when he or she subjectively knows of and
disregards an excessive risk to inmate health or safety.” Id.
(internal quotation marks omitted). Deliberate indifference may
be “manifested . . . by prison guards in intentionally denying
or delaying access to medical care.” Estelle v. Gamble, 429
U.S. 97, 104-05 (1976) (footnotes omitted).
Affording the complaint liberal construction, see Erickson
v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007), Davis alleged that he fell
from the top bunk of his bed face-first onto the concrete floor
and suffered significant and permanent injuries. Captain
Hilborn observed Davis lying face-down on the floor and
transported him to the medical ward. Davis asserts that Hilborn
then denied Davis access to any medical care and transferred him
to segregation when Davis demanded treatment, resulting in three
3
days passing before Davis was treated by prison medical staff.
The district court did not address this claim, concluding that
Davis merely complained about the course of treatment eventually
provided by prison officials. Because the court did not address
the three-day delay in treatment, we vacate the district court’s
order and remand for further proceedings. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
4