James Knox v. Gary Kempker

297 F. App'x 573
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedOctober 28, 2008
Docket07-2760
StatusUnpublished

This text of 297 F. App'x 573 (James Knox v. Gary Kempker) 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
James Knox v. Gary Kempker, 297 F. App'x 573 (8th Cir. 2008).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Oregon inmate James Knox appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal of his civil action regarding his placement in administrative segregation, the conditions there, and other alleged constitutional violations. Reviewing the record de novo and taking all facts alleged in the complaint as true, see Carter v. Arkansas, 392 F.3d 965, 968 (8th Cir.2004) (standard of review for Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) dismissals); Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir.1999) (per curiam) (standard of review for 28 U.S.C. § 1915A dismissals), we conclude that the district court properly dismissed the complaint, because the various claims Knox alleged either rely on legal conclusions rather than supporting facts, or simply do not state an actionable wrong, see Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65, 1969 & nn. 3, 8, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007); Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir.2004); Martin v. Sargent, 780 F.2d 1334, 1337 (8th Cir.1985).

Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal, but we modify it to be without prejudice.

1

. The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, and the Honorable Mary Ann L. Medler, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, to whom the remainder of the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

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

Related

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Martin v. Sargent
780 F.2d 1334 (Eighth Circuit, 1985)
Carter v. Arkansas
392 F.3d 965 (Eighth Circuit, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
297 F. App'x 573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-knox-v-gary-kempker-ca8-2008.