A state prisoner filed a lawsuit, claiming that he is allergic to smoke and that three prison officials were deliberately indifferent to his exposure to secondhand smoke.  Three defendants moved for summary judgment.  The district court ruled that Thomas met the objective prong of the test as to whether exposure to secondhand smoke in prison violated the prisoner’s Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment and that it is irrelevant that Thomas smoked in the past.  The Court also ruled that, as to the subjective prong, there was no evidence that two of the defendants had acted with deliberate indifference to the risk to Thomas’ health.  As to the third defendant, however, the Court ruled that there “is a disputed issue of material fact on whether [defendant] Duran was deliberately indifferent by ignoring Plaintiff’s repeated requests to be moved due to exposure to second-hand smoke.”

2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62781 (U.S.D.C. D. Ariz.).