Shawn Flowers-Bey v. Robert Webster

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedNovember 6, 2023
Docket23-1355
StatusUnpublished

This text of Shawn Flowers-Bey v. Robert Webster (Shawn Flowers-Bey v. Robert Webster) 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
Shawn Flowers-Bey v. Robert Webster, (8th Cir. 2023).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 23-1355 ___________________________

Shawn Flowers-Bey

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Robert Webster; Tomas Cabrera; Miguel Paniagua; Bonnie Brennen; Tamara Anderson; Mary Chandler; Dr. Karen Rhodes; Dr. Unknown McCollum; Dr. Unknown Kim; Tamra Crouch; Chantay Godert; Danial Redington; Dr. Unknown Lovelace

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Hannibal ____________

Submitted: October 30, 2023 Filed: November 6, 2023 [Unpublished] ____________

Before ERICKSON, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM. Shawn Flowers-Bey appeals following the district court’s1 dismissal of some claims, and adverse grant of summary judgment on the remaining claims, in his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon de novo review, we find that dismissal of some claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 was appropriate, for the reasons stated by the district court. See Kaden v. Slykhuis, 651 F.3d 966, 968 (8th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (standard of review). We also find that summary judgment was properly granted for defendants on the other claims. See Hancock v. Arnott, 39 F.4th 482, 486 (8th Cir. 2022) (standard of review; deliberate indifference requires inmate to show that he suffered from objectively serious medical need, and that defendants had actual knowledge of that need but deliberately disregarded it); Dulany v. Carnahan, 132 F.3d 1234, 1240 (8th Cir. 1997) (in face of physician affidavit indicating care provided was adequate, inmate cannot create question of fact by stating he felt treatment was inadequate). We do not address the claims Flowers-Bey has waived on appeal. See Hess v. Ables, 714 F.3d 1048, 1051 n.2 (8th Cir. 2013) (waiver of claims).

The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Ronnie L. White, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

-2-

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

Related

Kaden v. Slykhuis
651 F.3d 966 (Eighth Circuit, 2011)
Dulany v. Carnahan
132 F.3d 1234 (Eighth Circuit, 1997)
Shawna Hess v. Carol Abels
714 F.3d 1048 (Eighth Circuit, 2013)
Michael Hancock v. Jim Arnott
39 F.4th 482 (Eighth Circuit, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Shawn Flowers-Bey v. Robert Webster, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shawn-flowers-bey-v-robert-webster-ca8-2023.