Legal Opinion
John Crowley v. Bruce Bannister
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided October 30, 2013No. 12-15804PublishedCited by 579 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ALARCÓN, Senior Circuit Judge:
John Crowley appeals from the district court’s decision granting summary judgment and dismissing his pro se claim that his civil rights were violated because the named defendants, Dr. Robert Bannister, Dr. Daniel Sussman, Dwight Neven, Pat Diliddo, Tamiia Grisham, and Jane Balao-Cledera, were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs, in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Crowley, now represented by counsel, raises the following issues on appeal: (1) whether we have jurisdiction to hear this appeal under 28…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Jena Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department Al Olsen, Police Chief, Individually and as a Police AgentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Lee A. Rand v. James Rowland Nadim Khoury, M.D., William Bunnell Roy Lee Johnson Leo R. EstesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Meilleur v. StrongCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by579 opinions
- Jason Lee Harris v. J. Kenneth MangumCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Miriam Mendiola-Martinez v. Joseph ArpaioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Daniel Chavez v. David RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Juanita Stockwell v. City and County of San FrancisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Atayde v. Napa State HospitalDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2017
574 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.