he was given a medication for the swelling, and they the meds around 12 in the evening, so around 2 he passed out and hit his head on the bed rail and they treated him like he was lying and faking, he said he couldn see at all his vision was very blurry, so they sat him down in medical for 5 hrs and then sent him back, he told me the name of the meds that he was given and it was called cadura, when i researched it, it said that the first dose must be administered at night cause it causes a drop in the blood pressure, and you will faint, i am trying to find a lawyer to help me sue them for violating his civil and human rights, i have way more info but i know i cant right everything down here
Personal Injury Lawyer
He is entitled to be treated like a human being. He is entitled to necessary medical care. If he does not have a life threatening and permanent physical injury resulting from the failure to give him medicine, when you deem it appropriate, I think you may have an uphill battle finding an interested attorney.
You should consult an attorney in your State at once.
Medical Malpractice Attorney
Medical malpractice claims brought on behalf of an incarcerated inmate are handled differently under the law. They must be brought pursuant to a federal statute called "Section 1983" and they are technically civil rights claims. The 5th Circuit federal appeals court issued a ruling many years ago called "Estelle v. Gamble" that says a prison can only be held liable for a medical negligence case if the plaintiff can prove that the employees acted with "deliberate indifference to the rights and welfare" of the inmate. For lawyers, the difficult word in that phrase is "deliberate." that word carries a hard element of intent...meaning that a plaintiff must essentially prove that the prison personnel intentionally injured you. Proving intent is very, very, very hard. Another problem with your husband's case is that his damages are fairly limited.
You may want to speak to a law firm in Georgia and explore this.
Personal Injury Lawyer
Your husband has a potential "1983" cause of action but if he doesn't have a permanent injury (which fortunately for him it sounds like he doesn't) the cost of pursuing the claim for an attorney may not be worth the end result. You're facing hurdles of proving the delay in treatment and manner in which he was treated proximately caused his injuries. Then the question is what is it worth.