What is the scope of the federal court's finding of intentional indifference in the case of Lucas?

Appellant argues that the federal court's ruling was restricted exclusively to the "deliberate indifference" and its conclusion that the individual officers took "reasonable action regarding the obtaining of medical care" for Lucas was directed to this "heightened standard of culpability." We agree. Liability of public entities and public employees under Government Code section 845.6 is limited to serious and obvious medical conditions requiring immediate care. (Watson v. State of California (1993) 21 Cal.App.4th 836, 841, 26 Cal.Rptr.2d 262.) Their duty to provide medical care to prisoners is limited to "... cases where there is actual or constructive knowledge that the prisoner is in need of immediate medical care." (Ibid.) The public employee must know or have reason to know of the need of immediate medical care and fail to summon such care. (Id., at pp. 841-842, 26 Cal.Rptr.2d 262.)