Clayborne v. Tecumseh Department of Corrections

Eighth Circuit

Clayborne v. Tecumseh Department of Corrections

699 F. App'x 593

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedNovember 1, 2017

Docket17-1072

StatusUnpublished

This text of 699 F. App'x 593 (Clayborne v. Tecumseh Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clayborne v. Tecumseh Department of Corrections, 699 F. App'x 593 (8th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Nebraska inmate Robert Clayborne. appeals after the district court 1 adversely granted summary judgment, finding defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on Clayborne’s claim that they were deliberately indifferent to his needs during a prison riot.

Having carefully reviewed the record, and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that the district court properly granted summary judgment. See Beaulieu v. Ludeman, 690 F.3d 1017, 1024 (8th Cir. 2012) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo, viewing record in light most favorable to nonmovant); see also Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232, 129 S.Ct. 808, 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (to determine if defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, court must consider whether facts establish violation of constitutional or statutory right, and whether right was so clearly established that reasonable official would have known his actions were unlawr ful); Nelson v. Corr. Med. Servs., 583 F.3d 522, 528 (8th Cir. 2009) (in cases involving prison riots, wantonness necessary for deliberate indifference is demonstrated by prison officials acting “maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm”). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and Clayborne’s motion for a settlement conference is denied as moot.

1

. The Honorable Richard G, Kopf, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

In this pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Nebraska inmate Robert Clayborne. appeals after the district court 1 adversely granted summary judgment, finding defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on Clayborne’s claim that they were deliberately indifferent to his needs during a prison riot.

Having carefully reviewed the record, and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that the district court properly granted summary judgment. See Beaulieu v. Ludeman, 690 F.3d 1017, 1024 (8th Cir. 2012) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo, viewing record in light most favorable to nonmovant); see also Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232, 129 S.Ct. 808, 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (to determine if defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, court must consider whether facts establish violation of constitutional or statutory right, and whether right was so clearly established that reasonable official would have known his actions were unlawr ful); Nelson v. Corr. Med. Servs., 583 F.3d 522, 528 (8th Cir. 2009) (in cases involving prison riots, wantonness necessary for deliberate indifference is demonstrated by prison officials acting “maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm”). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and Clayborne’s motion for a settlement conference is denied as moot.

1

. The Honorable Richard G, Kopf, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

699 F. App'x 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clayborne-v-tecumseh-department-of-corrections-ca8-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack