Simmons, Jannace & Stagg
Erickson v. Pardus
In Erickson v. Pardus, a case focusing on the rights of prisoners, William Erickson filed a petition arguing that he was not receiving the health care he required while being confined in the Colorado State Prison. Supporting his petition with the argument that not receiving appropriate treatment for his Hepatitis C can be considered cruel and inhumane treatment, Erickson sued the Colorado State Prison and brought the suit to be presented in the US District Court in Colorado.
Barry Pardus as well as Doctor Anita Bloor were named as defendants in the lawsuit, both of which are officials that work in the Colorado State Prison facility. Erickson asserted that his health was jeopardized and that the officials in prison were apathetic about his health condition: first starting treatment and then ceasing it abruptly. Such actions were seen as a violation of one's 8th amendment rights. Meanwhile, the respondent in the case asserted that Erickson had taken advantage of his treatment situation - Erickson was receiving special injections every week until one of the syringes mysteriously vanished, only to be found in an area of the prison openly accessible to other prisoners. The respondents asserted that the syringe was adapted for illicit drug use, thus, treatments ceased.
Erickson was not represented by an attorney and made his complaints pro se: the case was at first dismissed on the grounds that Erickson's initial complaints were overly conclusory; the Supreme Court later overturned the decision and ruled that Erickson did not have to provide specific details in the allegation he posed, but that he merely needed to notify the respondent of the allegations. The decision handed down further asserts that pro se arguments should not be held to the stringent standards expected of arguments presented by legal professionals.
Click here to learn more about Debra L. Wabnik of Simmons, Jannace & Stagg
