Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-05097/USCOURTS-ca10-89-05097-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City of Barnsdall
Appellee
Roger Himstreet
Appellant
Sharon Himstreet
Appellant

Document Text:

PILED 

Uaiced StatcS Coun of Appeals 

.,..,.,th Cit!"''t 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 211990 

&OBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

ROGER HIMSTREET; SHARON HIMSTREET, 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

v. 

CITY OF BARNSDALL, a municipality 

within the State of Oklahoma; JESSE 

GARRETT, an individual, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) No. 89-5097 

) (D.C. No. 88-C-225-B) 

) (N.D. Okla.) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before McKAY, McWILLIAMS, and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. ~ Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Plaintiffs appeal from orders of the district court granting 

defendants' motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs' claims for 

relief for alleged violation of their civil rights, 42 u.s.c. 

S 1983, and violation of the Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppal. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-5097 Document: 010110051331 Date Filed: 11/21/1990 Page: 1 
Act, Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 51, s 151 et seq., and denying 

plaintiffs' motion for a new trial. On appeal, plaintiffs argue 

(1) there were sufficient questions of fact precluding disposition 

by summary judgment and (2) the Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims 

Act permits plaintiff Sharon Himstreet's claim for loss of 

consortium so long as plaintiff Roger Himstreet has a cause of 

action against defendants under the Act. 

Upon consideration of the briefs and record on appeal, we 

conclude the district court correctly granted summary judgment in 

favor of defendants. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the 

United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma 

for substantially the reasons stated in the 

January 19, 1989, and May 3 ,. 1989. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

PER CURIAM 

2 

orders filed 

Appellate Case: 89-5097 Document: 010110051331 Date Filed: 11/21/1990 Page: 2