Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01086/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01086-0/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. 04-1086

___________

Edward Allen Moore, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Ernest Jackson, D.D.S., * Western District of Missouri.

*

Defendant, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

James Keith, M.D., Randee Kaiser, *

*

Appellees, *

*

Karen Cornell, *

*

Defendant, *

*

Ralf Salke; Gerald Bommel; Steve *

Long; John Sydow, *

*

Appellees, *

*

Judy P. Draper; Dora Schriro, *

*

Defendants, *

*

William Wade, M.D.; Richard *

Washington; David Dormire; Michael *

Groose, *

*

Appellate Case: 04-1086 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/14/2004 Entry ID: 1821712 
1

The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

-2-

Appellees, *

*

ARA Services, doing business as *

Correctional Medical Systems, Inc., *

*

Defendants. *

___________

Submitted: October 1, 2004

Filed: October 14, 2004

___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Edward Moore appeals the district court’s1

 order denying his motion to enforce

a money judgment entered in his earlier 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We affirm.

In June 1999, Missouri inmate Moore successfully sued Correctional Medical

Systems (CMS) in a section 1983 action and was awarded $9,800 in compensatory

damages. After we affirmed the jury verdict, Moore moved under Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 69(a) to enjoin the State of Missouri (State) from seeking

reimbursement for the costs of his incarceration under the Missouri Incarceration

Reimbursement Act (MIRA) by attaching the money CMS had paid him to satisfy the

section 1983 judgment. The district court summarily denied Moore’s motion, but on

appeal we remanded to the district court to consider the applicability of Hankins v.

Finnel, 964 F.2d 853, 861 (8th Cir.) (holding MIRA invalid under Supremacy Clause

where State was attempting to recoup very same money it had paid to satisfy inmate’s

§ 1983 judgment against State employee; allowing State to proceed would eliminate

Appellate Case: 04-1086 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/14/2004 Entry ID: 1821712 
-3-

incentive of State or its employees to avoid violating inmates’ constitutional rights),

cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1013 (1992). On remand, the district court denied Moore’s

motion, finding that Hankins did not apply because it was CMS that had paid the

judgment, thus leaving intact CMS’s incentive to comply with the constitutional

rights of inmates.

We agree with the district court that because Moore’s judgment was not paid

by the State but by CMS, and because the record nowhere suggests the State intends

to indemnify CMS for its loss, Moore’s case falls outside the limited scope of

Hankins. See Hankins, 964 F.2d at 858 n.6 (acknowledging that holding was based

on “narrow and unique factual situation presented in [Hankins], which in itself is

without precedent”). Accordingly, because allowing the State to collect from

Moore’s judgment provides no benefit to CMS, the result reached by the district court

is not inconsistent with section 1983’s goal of deterring future deprivations of federal

constitutional rights. See id. at 861.

The judgment is affirmed.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-1086 Page: 3 Date Filed: 10/14/2004 Entry ID: 1821712