No. 21-7111

David Roy Worthy v. Corizon Medical Group, et al.

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-02-14
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: civil-rights delayed-diagnosis due-process government-liability informed-consent medical-malpractice medical-negligence patient-harm patient-rights professional-liability standard-of-care
Latest Conference: 2022-04-14
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a delayed diagnosis of a medical problem that results in a patient's health condition worsening constitutes a cognizable injury under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED (ny Qvesnow is 3 . nonosé 18 / When A Dele” OO crecrwrs cespenewre snoidrr TE vet 0 nN Lose THEEN PROKe . of (wea CoecKn NOM \ Soe\osnwr AN Te Tene ACK To pore As kama We Ov ; 5 pains yes EVES Ko . {Pp We | Co fELT of f Derition foR 4 Utt of CERTIRARI [MR Wott je pskiwb “The Govet To gene TUE YDSCESJoN CF THE Jonek Goll THAT mneed A Deltyco Driabwose of A medical ploblem 910 ot, [A Dele DAGNWos REFERS fo PN Jeg? UNE | ‘ae panent's Aenlya Commit Disensé oR Ailment is MOT DiageseO whew A ceasohnge nmevat of Time, Fr Meese wot Efe To jnSiancés WWEN patients Noes pot geek Mepien! care. . |Doetos "“DeRez” pp foot DIASM25E MR porthy’s menial §Govnitem® jsp 4 PROCESS [ONAL wey, 7 (Poctoh = Pet€L fs Employed Cy “ Corrizow mebhreal fund 1s (Lah 1b, fot The Micuigad Dept oF da cr eet yolS. ' , (Ak Worry pao A MRE's | ope AT THE ANN AcBsE va, Neo 57. Soespn Mespial yw Ayw Apbst micH , THAT clenply = stRte0 , A Moe severe medical DElima = pjo Bccor, Tie sal States Distettr evvtt Tit€onere Yevin Unite® sr1Ateo Covrthoose 23l W. Larayere Bovlevaey , ST (Clow Qateoit Michigan 42716 c OAs No | 1B-tv/945/ RECEIVED] | JAN 272909, | — UNACD gThtes dolls DE Appenls ok THe (Birt dipes — POTreR = sTEUerr oS cCevaridovxy (02 EAST (fIFTH sitet CiNCiMNATL CHIDO FSQ0> pppenl Chee NO QOIFA OW (| a4/ a0 THe VIED srhyes Misteet tout folk tHe eNnstaN Nistrct of Piepgal Sovtney pwislsn LE LOMMEN DATION Grau vl DEcennAanw? (neti — pry SUMMARY ~—TOOGemenK | MR worthy 1s AppEelne | { : : ! i an APDEMOIY JURISDICTION [ ] For cases from federal courts: The date on which the United States Court of Appeals decided my case was [25 [@e2, [ ] No petition for rehearing was timely filed in my case. [ ] A timely petition for rehearing was denied by the United States Court of Appeals on the following date: 3 ORO. , and a copy of the order denying rehearing appears at

Docket Entries

2022-04-18
Petition DENIED.
2022-03-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/14/2022.
2021-10-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 16, 2022)

Attorneys

David Roy Worthy
David Roy Worthy — Petitioner
David Roy Worthy — Petitioner