Difference between revisions of "Farmer v. Brennan"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | In '''''Farmer v. Brennan''''', 511 U.S. 825, 832 (1994), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] affirmed that a prison official's "deliberate indifference" to a substantial risk of serious harm to an inmate violates the Eighth Amendment, citing ''Helling v. McKinney'', 509 U.S. 25 (1993); ''Wilson v. Seiter'', 501 U.S. 294 (1991); ''Estelle v. Gamble'', 429 U.S. 97 (1976), and that "deliberate indifference" required a showing that the official was subjectively aware of the risk. | |
| + | |||
| + | The Court also noted that a prison doctor may have a constitutionally related professional obligation to communicate with superiors about seriously unsafe or unsanitary conditions in the cellblock. | ||
| + | [[category:United States Supreme Court Cases]] | ||
Revision as of 16:39, December 20, 2008
In Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 832 (1994), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that a prison official's "deliberate indifference" to a substantial risk of serious harm to an inmate violates the Eighth Amendment, citing Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25 (1993); Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294 (1991); Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976), and that "deliberate indifference" required a showing that the official was subjectively aware of the risk.
The Court also noted that a prison doctor may have a constitutionally related professional obligation to communicate with superiors about seriously unsafe or unsanitary conditions in the cellblock.