Case Explained: GREENWOOD V. PIERCE COUNTY MUNICIPALITY, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Filed: 2026-07-08

Docket: 3:21-cv-05874-JHC

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment in this civil rights action brought by a pretrial detainee alleging inadequate medical care under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court held that summary judgment was properly granted against Dr. Balderrama because the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence of objective deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs, noting that medical records showed the doctor promptly referred him to a specialist and responded to medication requests, and that mere disagreement with treatment does not constitute deliberate indifference. The court further affirmed the dismissal of the claim against Pierce County for failure to allege facts establishing an unconstitutional policy or custom causing the violation. Additionally, the appellate court found no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of leave to file a second amended complaint to add new defendants, as the plaintiff knew the relevant facts at the time of the original filing, and its denial of a motion to appoint counsel due to a lack of exceptional circumstances. The practical consequence is that the judgment against the defendants stands, and the appeal is concluded with no further relief granted.

Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.