Eighth Circuit
Presson v. Reed, 65 F.4th 357, 370 (8th Cir. 2023) (“Construing the facts in the light most favorable to Presson, his ‘right to adequate treatment was clearly established, and the district court properly denied the defendants qualified immunity.'”).
Dadd v. Anoka County, CIV. 14-4933 MJD/BRT, 2015 WL 3935897, at *7 (D. Minn. June 24, 2015), aff’d, 827 F.3d 749 (8th Cir. 2016) (stating that “Plaintiff’s constitutional right to adequate medical care for his pain was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct, both as a matter of general legal principles and specific case law”).
Bailey v. County of Kittson, CIV 07-1939 ADM/RLE, 2008 WL 906349, at *12 (D. Minn. Mar. 31, 2008) (“There is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the Kittson County Individual Defendants were deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff’s need for Hepatitis medications.”).
Johnson v. Hay, 931 F.2d 456, 461 (8th Cir. 1991) (“At the time of Hay’s action, the law clearly established that a prison pharmacist could not intentionally interfere with or fail to carry out treatment prescribed for a prisoner.”).