Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-10-01144/USCOURTS-ca8-10-01144-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 10-1144

___________

Samuel Lewis Taylor, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Robyn Combs; Pamela Swartz; *

Walter Koon; Curtis Nelson; * [UNPUBLISHED]

Gregory Patrick; John Doe; Dave *

Dormire; Lisa Jones; Darlene Wansing *

Steve Houston; Chris Swicord, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: July 7, 2010

Filed: July 22, 2010

___________

Before LOKEN, BYE, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Inmate Samuel Lewis Taylor appeals from the final judgment of the district

court in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have carefully reviewed the record and

conclude, for the reasons stated by the district court, that it was proper to dismiss,

under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e)(2)(B), Taylor’s claims concerning loss or

damage to his property; that it was also proper for the court to dismiss the claims

against the John Doe defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m); and that

Appellate Case: 10-1144 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/22/2010 Entry ID: 3685967
1

Based on the record below, including Taylor’s complaint, we interpret Taylor’s

excessive-force claim as arising only from the alleged hitting. 

-2-

summary judgment was warranted on the claim against Pamela Swartz. Contrary to

Taylor’s assertions on appeal, there is nothing in the district court record indicating

he sought leave to amend his complaint to add another defendant.

As to the grant of summary judgment on the remaining claims against the

Missouri Department of Corrections (MDOC) officials and employees, we agree with

the district court’s analysis on all claims but those of excessive force against

defendants Walter Koon, Curtis Nelson, and Gregory Patrick arising from an incident

when they and other members of a movement team moved Taylor from one cell to

another. Even if Taylor could not specifically identify which member or members of

the movement team hit him, as he pointed out below, the MDOC defendants did not

deny that he was hit during transport while he was face-down on a gurney and

cuffed--and thus when he was no longer a threat--or that none of the movement-team

members tried to stop the hitting.1

 See Krout v. Goemmer, 583 F.3d 556, 565 (8th

Cir. 2009) (prison guard could be liable under § 1983 if he saw another correctional

officer hit inmate several times but did nothing to stop assault); Walker v. Bowersox,

526 F.3d 1186, 1188 (8th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (officers may reasonably use force

in good-faith effort to restore or maintain discipline, but force may not be used

maliciously or sadistically for purpose of causing harm; in considering whether force

was reasonable and in good faith, courts must consider, among other things, need for

applying force and threat responsible officials reasonably perceived). Accordingly,

we affirm the dismissal of all but the excessive force claims against Koon, Nelson, and

Patrick, which we remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We

also grant Taylor’s motion for leave to use the original record.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 10-1144 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/22/2010 Entry ID: 3685967