Kenneth Daywitt v. Jodi Harpstead
This text of Kenneth Daywitt v. Jodi Harpstead (Kenneth Daywitt v. Jodi Harpstead) 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.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________
No. 24-1138 ___________________________
Kenneth Daywitt
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
David Jannetta
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff
Steven Hogy
Merlin Adolphson
Michael Whipple; Peter Lonergan, and others similarly situated; Russell Hatton
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellants
v.
Jodi Harpstead, DHS Commissioner; in their individual and official capacities; Marshall Smith, in their individual and official capacities; Nancy Johnston, in their individual and official capacities; Jim Berg, in their individual and official capacities; Jannine Hebert, in their individual and official capacities; Kevin Moser, in their individual and official capacities; Terry Kniesel, in their individual and official capacities; Raymond Ruotsalainen, in their individual and official capacities
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota ____________
Submitted: September 12, 2024 Filed: September 19, 2024 [Unpublished] ____________
Before BENTON, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________
PER CURIAM.
The district court1 granted summary judgment in favor of defendants in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action brought by civilly committed detainees in the Minnesota Sex Offender Program. After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that the district court, in its thorough and well-reasoned opinion, properly granted summary judgment. See Morris v. Cradduck, 954 F.3d 1055, 1058 (8th Cir. 2020) (reviewing grant of summary judgment de novo). We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendants’ motion to exclude expert testimony. See Lancaster v. BNSF Ry. Co., 75 F.4th 967, 969 (8th Cir. 2023) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________
1 The Honorable Nancy E. Brasel, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Elizabeth Cowan Wright, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Kenneth Daywitt v. Jodi Harpstead, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kenneth-daywitt-v-jodi-harpstead-ca8-2024.