United States v. Phillip Brumfield

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 12-1008
___________
John Willard Greywind, *
*
Appellant, * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the
v. * District of North Dakota.
*
John T. Podrebarac; Leann K. Bertsch; * [UNPUBLISHED]
Patrick Branson; Kathy Bachmeier, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: July 5, 2012
Filed: July 9, 2012
___________
Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Inmate John Greywind appeals the district court’s adverse grant of summary1
judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action claiming deliberate indifference to his
serious medical needs. After careful de novo review, we conclude that summary
judgment was proper. See Mason v. Corr. Med. Servs., Inc., 559 F.3d 880, 884-85
(8th Cir. 2009). As to defendant Podrebarac, we agree with the district court that the
The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, United States District Judge for the District1
of North Dakota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Charles
S. Miller, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of North Dakota.

-- 1 of 2 --

claims against him are based on Greywind’s unsupported disagreement with medical
treatment decisions, and that Greywind did not adequately counter defendants’
evidence as to the appropriate treatment for his dental root fracture. See Meuir v.
Greene Cnty. Jail Emps., 487 F.3d 1115, 1118-19 (8th Cir. 2007). And because we
conclude that there was no underlying constitutional violation, the claims against the
remaining defendants likewise fail. See Morris v. Lanpher, 563 F.3d 399, 403 (8th
Cir. 2009). Accordingly, we deny as moot Greywind’s pending motion for a stay, and
we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --