F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FEB 28 2000
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
JACQUELINE LOU QUARTERMAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. No. 99-8076
(D.C. No. 97-CV-273-B)
BILL BORT, Deputy United States (D. Wyo.)
Marshall,
Defendant,
and
ANNE ZIMMERMAN, Natrona
County Detention Center Contract
Physician; D. C. CHAPMAN,
Natrona County Detention Center
Nurse; J. NATION, Natrona County
Detention Center Nurse,
Defendants-Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before TACHA , ANDERSON , and LUCERO , Circuit Judges.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Plaintiff Jacqueline Lou Quarterman is a federal prisoner appearing pro se.
Defendant Bill Bort is a federal marshal, and defendants Zimmerman, Chapman,
and Nation are on the medical staff of Natrona County Detention Center, where
Ms. Quarterman was held for a period of time. Ms. Quarterman filed a civil
rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named
Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971), alleging that
defendants were deliberately indifferent to her serious medical needs, in violation
of her Eighth Amendment rights. The district court dismissed Ms. Quarterman’s
claims against defendant Bort, and granted summary judgment to defendants
Zimmerman, Chapman, and Nation. Ms. Quarterman appeals from the grant of
summary judgment to defendants Zimmerman, Chapman, and Nation. She does
not appeal the district court’s dismissal of her claims against defendant Bort.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
We review the grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same
standard used by the district court. See Lopez v. LeMaster , 172 F.3d 756, 759
(10th Cir. 1999) (discussing Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)). Summary judgment is
-2-
appropriate “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and
admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no
genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to
a judgment as a matter of law.” Rule 56(c).
A prisoner may establish an Eighth Amendment violation by showing that
the jail’s medical staff exhibited “deliberate indifference to [her] serious medical
needs.” Estelle v. Gamble , 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976). Deliberate indifference is
more than mere negligence, however. A negligent failure to provide adequate
medical care, even to the point of medical malpractice, does not rise to the level
of a constitutional violation. See id. Further, a prisoner’s mere disagreement
with medical personnel about the care they administered does not establish
deliberate indifference. See Ramos v. Lamm , 639 F.2d 559, 575 (10th Cir. 1980).
We have carefully reviewed the parties’ materials and the record on
appeal. 1 We are unpersuaded by Ms. Quarterman’s assertions of error. As the
district court noted in its order, Ms. Quarterman’s “recitation of the treatment
she received and the documents she herself submitted establish that Defendants
[Zimmerman, Chapman, and Nation] were not deliberately indifferent to her
medical needs.” R. Doc. 34, at 7. Her disagreement with the timing and manner
1
We have not considered exhibit A to Ms. Quarterman’s brief on appeal
because that material was not presented to the district court. See Allen v.
Minnstar, Inc. , 8 F.3d 1470, 1475 (10th Cir. 1993).
-3-
of her treatment is insufficient to support a constitutional claim. See Ramos ,
639 F.2d at 575.
Appellees’ motion to strike exhibit A to appellant’s brief on appeal
is granted. The judgment of the United States District Court for the District
of Wyoming is AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
Entered for the Court
Stephen H. Anderson
Circuit Judge
-4-