Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-03307/USCOURTS-ca10-91-03307-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

F IL~ D 

Unimcl States Court of App~:i.ln UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tent1⁄2 r"lr-ul~ 

TENTH CIRCUIT M:\R O 2 1992 

KERRY BROWN BEY, SR., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

J. MICHAEL QUINLAN; H. ALLEN CARVER; 

RALPH SWOBODA; SANDRA K. BRANSON; 

ROBERT W. WOOD; CARL J. KOPPLIN; 

FLORA MAGEE; ROBERT M. FENNER, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No . 91-3307 

(D.C. No. 91-CV-3240) 

( D. Kan.) 

Before MOORE, TACHA, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P . 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 

Appellant Kerry Brown Bey appeals an order of the district 

court dismissing his prose civil rights complaint. The district 

court found that the complaint failed to set forth a claim of 

constitutional dimension. We exercise jurisdiction under 28 

U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential v a lue and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 91-3307 Document: 010110226695 Date Filed: 03/02/1992 Page: 1 
Appellant argues that the district court misconstrued the 

nature of his claims and also failed to provide suff icient grounds 

for dismissing the complaint. Appellant contends that the 

district court erroneously dismissed the complaint for lack of 

federal jurisdiction and failed to render a judgment on the merits 

of the complaint. 

After reviewing the record, we reject appellant's arguments. 

We find no merit to appellant's claim that the district court 

misconstrued the nature of the complaint. Further, we find that 

the district court rendered a judgment on the merits of the 

complaint. We agree with the district court, that appellant's 

complaint fails to state a colorable claim of constitutional 

dimension. 

We GRANT appellant's motion for leave to proceed in forrna 

pauperis and AFFIRM the district court's judgment denying relief. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-2-

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 91-3307 Document: 010110226695 Date Filed: 03/02/1992 Page: 2