Hymer v. Kross
SimpleOriginal

Summary

This federal case dismissed a suit by a prisoner removed from a MAT program for alleged diversion. The court found no deliberate indifference or due process violation, as medical care was provided and grievance delays caused no harm.

2022 | Federal Juristiction

Hymer v. Kross

Keywords federal case; prisoner; MAT program; drug diversion; deliberate indifference; due process violation; medical care; grievance procedure; court ruling; inmate lawsuit
Open Case as PDF

Summary

This federal court case dismissed a prisoner's claim following removal from a medication-assisted treatment (MAT) program based on allegations of medication diversion. The court determined that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate deliberate indifference to his medical needs or a violation of his due process rights. This conclusion stemmed from the continued provision of medical care and a finding that any delays in the grievance process did not result in demonstrable harm to the plaintiff.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

A federal court dismissed a lawsuit filed by an incarcerated individual who was removed from a medication-assisted treatment (MAT) program. The court determined that the removal did not constitute deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, nor did it violate the plaintiff's due process rights. This conclusion was based on the continued provision of medical care and a finding that any delays in processing grievances did not result in demonstrable harm.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

A federal court threw out a lawsuit filed by a prisoner who was kicked out of a medication-assisted treatment (MAT) program. The prisoner claimed the removal was unfair. The judge decided there was no evidence of deliberate indifference to the prisoner's needs or that his rights were violated. The court noted the prisoner received medical care and that any delays in handling his complaints did not cause him any harm.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

A prisoner sued the government because he was removed from a substance treatment program. The judge said the prisoner was not treated unfairly. The prisoner got medical care, and even though it took a while to deal with his complaints, it didn't hurt him. So, the judge threw out the case.

Open Case as PDF

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

No. CV 3:22-1531, 2022 WL 17978265 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 28, 2022), rev'd in part, No. 23-2374, 2024 WL 3026781 (3d Cir. June 17, 2024)

Highlights