Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01178/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01178-0/pdf.json

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

---

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

STEVEN CLOUSE, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

FI LED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Ci:-n.1it 

FEB 9 1990 

&OBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

V • ) 

) 

EL PASO COUNTY JAIL; BERNARD ) 

BERRY; WAYNE G. KING; DEPUTY ) 

RAMSEY; DEPUTY ZIEGLER, ) 

No. 89-1178 

(D.C. No. 88-B-1791) 

( D. Colo.) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before TACHA, BALDOCK, 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. 

Steven Clouse appeals from the order of the district court 

dismissing his 42 u.s.c. § 1983 claim against El Paso County Jail, 

the El Paso County Sheriff, and various officers. Clouse contends 

the district court erred in accepting the magistrate's 

recommendations that the cause be dismissed. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value 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: 89-1178 Document: 01019963025 Date Filed: 02/09/1990 Page: 1 
f 

After a hearing, the magistrate issued a recommendation 

carefully outlining the major claims advanced by Clouse. The 

magistrate characterized many of the allegations as being vague 

and conclusory, but considered those claims that Clouse had 

established with reasonable definiteness. The magistrate rejected 

each of these claims, finding that mere verbal abuse did not rise 

to the level of a constitutional violation, and that the other 

claims did not allege either an excessive use of force or any 

documented injuries other than a bruise. On these grounds, the 

magistrate recommended the action be dismissed. 

We agree with the magistrate and district judge that many of 

the allegations are vague and conclusory. We have reviewed the 

entire record and find that the magistrate's recommendation and 

the district court's order are not in error. We have specifically 

considered Clouse's contentions concerning the adequacy of medical 

care and find that they rise at most to disputes over proper 

treatment and diagnosis, not deliberate indifference. In the 

absence of deliberate indifference, Clouse has not stated a 

cognizable claim of constitutional deprivation. 

The motion to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. The 

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The mandate shall 

issue forthwith. 

2 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 89-1178 Document: 01019963025 Date Filed: 02/09/1990 Page: 2