Scott Scanlon v. Correctional Medical , 126 F. App'x 761 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 04-2852
    ___________
    Scott Scanlon,                        *
    *
    Appellant,                *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                              * District Court for the
    * Eastern District of Arkansas.
    Correctional Medical Services;        *
    Roland Anderson, Regional             *
    Medical Director, CMS; Max            *
    Mobley, Deputy Director, Arkansas     *
    Department of Correction; Dr. Robin   *
    Hickerson, Former ADC Psychiatrist; * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Dr. Solomon Mogbo, Former CMS         *
    Doctor, ADC; Lorne Ryan, Consult      *
    Doctor,                               *
    *
    Appellees.                *
    ___________
    Submitted: March 23, 2005
    Filed: March 24, 2005
    ___________
    Before MELLOY, McMILLIAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    In this interlocutory appeal, Arkansas prisoner Scott Scanlon contests the
    district court’s1 denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction. Scanlon claims that
    defendants are violating the Eighth Amendment through their deliberate indifference
    to his serious medical needs, and requests transfer to “an appropriate medical
    facility.”
    The district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that a preliminary
    injunction was not warranted in this case because Scanlon showed neither a threat of
    irreparable harm nor a probability of success on the merits. The record reflects that
    Scanlon is receiving ongoing medical care, and that he merely disagrees with
    defendant medical providers’ diagnoses and treatment. See Bandag, Inc. v. Jack’s
    Tire & Oil, Inc., 
    190 F.3d 924
    , 926 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (standard of review);
    Smith v. Marcantonio, 
    910 F.2d 500
    , 502 (8th Cir. 1990) (mere disagreement with
    course of treatment does not state constitutional claim for deliberate indifference);
    Dataphase Sys., Inc. v. C.L. Sys., Inc., 
    640 F.2d 109
    , 113 (8th Cir. 1981) (en banc)
    (factors to consider in deciding whether to grant preliminary injunction).
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the
    Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the
    Honorable H. David Young, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District
    of Arkansas.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-2852

Citation Numbers: 126 F. App'x 761

Filed Date: 3/24/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023