Case ID: f-appx_2/html/0590-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jerry X. ELLIS, Plaintiff, Samuel Duncan, Appellant, v. B. COLLINS; T. Pitts; T. Campbell; R. Morgan; S. Outlaw; D. Heflin; R. Wimberly; Dr. Oglesby; Dr. Creason; E. Engstrom; M. Mobley; Dr. Wright; Dr. Toombs; M. Caldwell; Dr. Rowe; D. Terrell; K. Triggs; R. Anthony; E. Yarbrough, Appellees.
    No. 00-1769.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 7, 2001.
    Filed: March 9, 2001.
    
      Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Arkansas inmate Samuel Duncan claimed that a number of correctional officers used excessive force in taking him to the infirmary— where anti-psychotic medication was administered against his will — and then to an isolation cell. The district court granted defendants summary judgment, relying in significant part on a videotape of the incident, and finding the tape corroborated defendants’ other evidence and depicted no constitutional violation.

Following our de novo review, and applying the same standards as the district court, see Dulany v. Carnahan, 132 F.3d 1234, 1237 (8th Cir.1997), we agree that Duncan failed to rebut defendants’ evidence that the force applied did not violate Duncan’s rights, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Wilson v. Spain, 209 F.3d 713, 716-17 (8th Cir.2000); see also Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 227, 110 S.Ct. 1028, 108 L.Ed.2d 178 (1990). Duncan’s other arguments — concerning his attorney’s conduct in moving to withdraw and the fact that defendants showed his attorney, but not him, the videotape — are unavailing in this civil proceeding.

Accordingly, we affirm. 
      
      . The HONORABLE HENRY WOODS, United States District Judge for the Eastern DisIrict of Arkansas.