Espinal v. Coughlin

• Decision Date: 21 May 1990
• Citation: 161 A.D.2d 712,558 N.Y.S.2d 840
• Parties: In the Matter of Herminio ESPINAL, Appellant, v. Thomas A. COUGHLIN III, etc., et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 840

558 N.Y.S.2d 840

161 A.D.2d 712

In the Matter of Herminio ESPINAL, Appellant, v. Thomas A. COUGHLIN III, etc., et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division,

Second Department.

May 21, 1990

Daniel Foley (Richard A. Gerbino, Staten Island, of counsel), for appellant. Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen. (Andrea Green, New York City, of counsel), for respondents.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to compel the respondent to provide the medication Tylox for the treatment of petitioner's back pain, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.), dated April 10, 1985, which dismissed the proceeding. ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. We agree with the Supreme Court's determination that the record does not support the petitioner's claim that the correctional authorities have been deliberately indifferent to his medical needs (see, Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104, 97 S.Ct. 285, 291, 50 L.Ed.2d 251; Matter of De Flumer v. Dalsheim, 122 A.D.2d 872, 873, 505 N.Y.S.2d 919; Matter of Ronson v. Commr. of Correction, 112 A.D.2d 488, 489, 491 N.Y.S.2d 209). Nor is there anything in the record which suggests that the court should substitute its judgment for that of the treating physicians (see, Matter of De Flumer v. Dalsheim, supra ). Accordingly, the petition was properly denied.

KOOPER, J.P., and SULLIVAN, HARWOOD and BALLETTA, JJ., concur.