Johnson v. Baldwin

Eighth Circuit

Johnson v. Baldwin

426 F. App'x 475

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedAugust 22, 2011

DocketNo. 10-3573

StatusPublished

This text of 426 F. App'x 475 (Johnson v. Baldwin) 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

Johnson v. Baldwin, 426 F. App'x 475 (8th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

William Patrick Johnson appeals the district court’s¹ adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon careful review, we conclude that the denial of substitute counsel was not an abuse of discretion, and that defendants were entitled to summary judgment for the reasons the district court stated. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

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

PER CURIAM.

William Patrick Johnson appeals the district court’s¹ adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon careful review, we conclude that the denial of substitute counsel was not an abuse of discretion, and that defendants were entitled to summary judgment for the reasons the district court stated. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

426 F. App'x 475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-baldwin-ca8-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack