Albert Reece v. Robert Knowls

¶1 [UNPUBLISHED]

¶2 Albert Reece appeals from the district court’s 1 dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983*648 complaint, wherein he alleged that he lost sight in his left eye as a result of defendants’ prescribing him medication which they should have known would cause him to lose his eyesight. We conclude dismissal was proper, because medical negligence is not enough to maintain a section 1988 action. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106-07, 97 S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.