Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-15-02764/USCOURTS-ca8-15-02764-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jody Arnold
Appellee
John Hoskins
Appellee
Michael McGill
Appellee
Paula Huffman Phillips
Appellee
John Roach
Appellee
Samuel Lewis Taylor
Appellant
Darlene Wansing
Appellee
Unknown Wilheight
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-2764

___________________________

Samuel Lewis Taylor

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Paula Huffman Phillips, Function Unit Manager; John Hoskins, Correctional

Officer; Michael McGill, Correctional Officer; John Roach, Correctional Officer;

Unknown Wilheight, Correctional Officer; Darlene Wansing, Financial Officer;

Jody Arnold, Correctional Officer

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau

____________

 Submitted: March 21, 2016

Filed: March 24, 2016

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, BYE, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 15-2764 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/24/2016 Entry ID: 4381217 
Missouri inmate Samuel Lewis Taylor appeals following the district court’s1

adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We find that

Taylor’s claims of access to the courts, conspiracy, and due process were properly

dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), see Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171

(8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (de novo review), because Taylor’s complaint contained

insufficient facts to support such claims, see Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th

Cir. 2004) (pro se complaints must be liberally construed, but must allege sufficient

facts to support claims advanced). Further, we find that summary judgment was

properly granted on Taylor’s remaining First Amendment retaliation claims. See Holt

v. Howard, 806 F.3d 1129, 1132 (8th Cir. 2015) (de novo review); Santiago v. Blair,

707 F.3d 984, 991 (8th Cir. 2013) (elements of retaliation claim). Finally, we find 2

no error in the denial of Taylor’s motion to compel. See Heart of Am. Grain Insp.

Serv., Inc. v. Mo. Dep’t of Agric., 123 F.3d 1098, 1107 (8th Cir. 1997) (gross-abuseof-discretion standard of review). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. See

8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr., United States DistrictJudge for the

1

Eastern District of Missouri.

We need not address the district court’s dismissal of the claims against John 2

Hoskins and Unknown Wilheight when service wasreturned unexecuted, because the

summary judgment record showed that Taylor would not have prevailed on these

claims.

-2-

Appellate Case: 15-2764 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/24/2016 Entry ID: 4381217