Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-19-01832/USCOURTS-ca8-19-01832-0/pdf.json

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

---

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-1832

___________________________

Herbert W. Morrison, Jr.

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Andrew J. Hale, Officer, Individual Capacity

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee

Timothy Sweeso, Officer, Individual Capacity; Shawn Reiland, Officer, Individual

Capacity; Timothy Green, Officer, Individual Capacity; John Doe, 1-2; City of

Florissant; Ashley Bailey-Smith, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Individual

Capacity; Steven Grim, Officer, Individual Capacity; Tina M. Broadway; Robyn

Ambs; Kathleen M. Pickett

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis

 ____________

 Submitted: December 30, 2019

Filed: January 8, 2020 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________

Appellate Case: 19-1832 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/08/2020 Entry ID: 4868694
PER CURIAM.

Missouri inmate Herbert Morrison appeals the district court’s

1

discoveryrelated rulings and adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

action. We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying

Morrison’s motions to compel. See Elnashar v. Speedway SuperAmerica, LLC, 484

F.3d 1046, 1052 (8th Cir. 2007) (reviewing denial of motion to compel for gross

abuse of discretion). Further, having carefully reviewed the record and the arguments

on appeal, we conclude the district court did not err in granting summary judgment. 

See Odom v. Kaizer, 864 F.3d 920, 921 (8th Cir. 2017) (reviewing grant of summary

judgment de novo). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1The Honorable Nannette A. Baker, United States Magistrate Judge for the

Eastern District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-2-

Appellate Case: 19-1832 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/08/2020 Entry ID: 4868694