Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-03035/USCOURTS-ca10-92-03035-0/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 TENTH CIRCUIT 

FILL D 

United Stat.es Coμrt(?f AP""'lf1

~ 

Tenth Circuit 

CARROL RICHARD OLSON, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

DOUGLAS WHITAKER; SAM MASON; STATE OF ) 

KANSAS, DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND ) 

PARKS; JACK LACY, Director, Kansas ) 

Wildlife and Parks; PARNELL MILES; R.M. ) 

FRANKS, INC . , Fur Broker; BILL ROBSON; ) 

STAN WILKINS; TURNER & BOISSEAU, INC . ; ) 

C. WARD, L.E. Supervisor, Wildlife and ) 

Parks; CARLA OLSON; DAVE GENTRY, Special) 

Operations Officer, Wildlife and Parks; ) 

RICHARD HARROLD, Chief of Special ) 

Operations, Wildlife and Parks; KORNY ) 

TRADING COMPANY; LLOYD FOX, Wildlife and) 

Parks; DENNIS MCPHAIL, KBI Laboratory; ) 

ROBERT STEPHEN, Attorney General; HAROLD) 

COLEMAN, Bourbon County Sheriff; PAUL ) 

"CHRIS" NELSON, Bourbon County Attorney;) 

JOHN TAYLOR, Deputy Sheriff of Bourbon ) 

County; ROSE STOUGHTON, Magistrate Court) 

Clerk, ) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

APR 1 6 1993 

ROBERT L. HOECL_:_ ·_, Clerk 

No . 92-3035 

(D.C. No. 92-3018-S) 

(D. Kan.) 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

n ot be cite d, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of t h e law of 

the case, r e s judicata, or collateral estoppel . 10t h Cir _ R. 

36 . 3. 

Appellate Case: 92-3035 Document: 010110212748 Date Filed: 04/16/1993 Page: 1 
Before SEYMOUR and ANDERSON, 

District Judge. 

ircuit Judges, and RUSSELL,** 

**Honorable David L. Russell, District 

District Court for the Western Di trict of 

designation. 

Judge, United States 

Oklahoma, sitting by 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that o al argument would not materially 

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

34(a) ; 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

he case is therefore ordered 

Carrol Richard Olson appea s an order of the district court 

dismissing his complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The 

district court found that plaint ff's claims were conclusory and, 

further, that plaintiff failed to identify an arguable factual 

basis for imposing liability n many of the defendants. The 

district court dismissed the act on without prejudice so that 

Olson could "file a complaint hich more clearly sets forth the 

factual basis of his claims 

clearly identifies any 

specific information which 

n under color of state law which 

he asserts provides a basis for i posing liability on the named 

defendants under§ 1983." Rec., oc. 4 at 2. Instead of amending 

his complaint, Olson filed appeal. After reviewing the 

complaint and Olson's ts on appeal1 

we affirm for 

substantially the same reasons st ted by the district court . 

1 Olson's attack on the parti 

is wholly unsupported. 

2 

ity of the district court judge 

Appellate Case: 92-3035 Document: 010110212748 Date Filed: 04/16/1993 Page: 2 
Olson's motion to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED, and 

the judgment of the United States District Court for the District 

of Kansas is AFFIRMED. 

Entered for the Court 

Stephen H. Anderson 

Circuit Judge 

3 

Appellate Case: 92-3035 Document: 010110212748 Date Filed: 04/16/1993 Page: 3 
Appellate Case: 92-3035 Document: 010110212748 Date Filed: 04/16/1993 Page: 4