Jackie Walker v. James D. Purkett Dr. M. Baggot Sharon Fairchild Ken Kluver Terry Butcher Dorothy Pulley Sherry Hosking

Eighth Circuit

Jackie Walker v. James D. Purkett Dr. M. Baggot Sharon Fairchild Ken Kluver Terry Butcher Dorothy Pulley Sherry Hosking

60 F.3d 831, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 25427, 1995 WL 408228

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJuly 12, 1995

Docket94-3288

StatusPublished

This text of 60 F.3d 831 (Jackie Walker v. James D. Purkett Dr. M. Baggot Sharon Fairchild Ken Kluver Terry Butcher Dorothy Pulley Sherry Hosking) 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

Jackie Walker v. James D. Purkett Dr. M. Baggot Sharon Fairchild Ken Kluver Terry Butcher Dorothy Pulley Sherry Hosking, 60 F.3d 831, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 25427, 1995 WL 408228 (8th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

60 F.3d 831
NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.

Jackie WALKER, Appellant,
v.
James D. PURKETT; Dr. M. Baggot; Sharon Fairchild; Ken
Kluver; Terry Butcher; Dorothy Pulley; Sherry
Hosking, Appellees.

No. 94-3288

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: June 26, 1995.
Filed: July 12, 1995.

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Jackie Walker, a Missouri inmate, appeals the district court's1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action against various Missouri prison officials. Walker alleged that officials at the Farmington Correctional Center violated his Eighth Amendment rights when they failed to promptly provide him with medical care, and that the conditions of his cell also violated the Eighth Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment to defendants. We have reviewed the record and the parties' briefs, and determine that summary judgment was appropriately granted and an opinion would lack precedential value. We conclude that the district court did not grossly abuse its discretion in its rulings on the parties' motions to compel discovery. See Kinkead v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 49 F.3d 454, 457 (8th Cir. 1995). We do not address those arguments Walker makes that relate to claims dismissed below and not on appeal. Likewise, we need not address appellees' motion to dismiss Ken Kluver as a party to the appeal.

AFFIRMED. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

The Honorable Jean C. Hamilton, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

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

60 F.3d 831
NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.

Jackie WALKER, Appellant,
v.
James D. PURKETT; Dr. M. Baggot; Sharon Fairchild; Ken
Kluver; Terry Butcher; Dorothy Pulley; Sherry
Hosking, Appellees.

No. 94-3288

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: June 26, 1995.
Filed: July 12, 1995.

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Jackie Walker, a Missouri inmate, appeals the district court's1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action against various Missouri prison officials. Walker alleged that officials at the Farmington Correctional Center violated his Eighth Amendment rights when they failed to promptly provide him with medical care, and that the conditions of his cell also violated the Eighth Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment to defendants. We have reviewed the record and the parties' briefs, and determine that summary judgment was appropriately granted and an opinion would lack precedential value. We conclude that the district court did not grossly abuse its discretion in its rulings on the parties' motions to compel discovery. See Kinkead v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 49 F.3d 454, 457 (8th Cir. 1995). We do not address those arguments Walker makes that relate to claims dismissed below and not on appeal. Likewise, we need not address appellees' motion to dismiss Ken Kluver as a party to the appeal.

AFFIRMED. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

The Honorable Jean C. Hamilton, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 F.3d 831, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 25427, 1995 WL 408228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackie-walker-v-james-d-purkett-dr-m-baggot-sharon-ca8-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack