Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-16-01375/USCOURTS-ca10-16-01375-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Peter Crum
Appellee
Carol Rodgers
Appellee
Edmond Walker
Appellant

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

_________________________________ 

EDMOND WALKER, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant, 

v. 

PETER CRUM, M.D.*

; CAROL 

RODGERS, 

 Defendants - Appellees. 

No. 16-1375 

(D.C. No. 1:15-CV-01915-RBJ-MEH) 

(D. Colo.) 

_________________________________ 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT

_________________________________ 

Before HARTZ, HOLMES, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges. 

_________________________________ 

 Plaintiff Edmond Walker sued Dr. Peter Crum under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging a 

violation of the Eighth Amendment while he was a pretrial detainee in the Denver County 

Jail. His claim is that after he suffered a hip injury, he was subjected to unnecessary pain 

 



 The district-court caption spells the doctor’s last name as “Crumb.” But his brief 

on appeal consistently spells the name without a “b.” We have corrected the caption 

here. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined 

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of 

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore 

ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding 

precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral 

estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with 

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit 

February 7, 2017

Elisabeth A. Shumaker 

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 16-1375 Document: 01019761751 Date Filed: 02/07/2017 Page: 1 
2 

because of Dr. Crum’s deliberate indifference in providing him medical care. See 

Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994). 

 The United States District Court for the District of Colorado granted summary 

judgment to Dr. Crum. The court’s opinion thoroughly reviews the facts and the law. 

We see nothing to add. On appeal, Plaintiff does not point to any factual errors in that 

opinion and his “legal” argument is too brief and conclusory to be helpful. 

 We AFFIRM the judgment below. Mr. Walker’s motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis is DENIED. 

 Entered for the Court 

 Harris L Hartz 

 Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 16-1375 Document: 01019761751 Date Filed: 02/07/2017 Page: 2