Case Name: Keith L. THOMPSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of State of Florida, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-04-19
Citations: 129 F. App'x 497
Docket Number: No. 04-14231; D.C. Docket No. 03-20077-CV-ASG
Parties: Keith L. THOMPSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of State of Florida, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before ANDERSON, BLACK and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 129
Pages: 497–498

Head Matter:
Keith L. THOMPSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of State of Florida, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 04-14231.
Non-Argument Calendar
D.C. Docket No. 03-20077-CV-ASG.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
April 19, 2005.
Cornelius Shiver, Jr., Law Offices of Cornelius Shiver, P.A., Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Tamara Weinstein Grosko, Miami-Dade County Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before ANDERSON, BLACK and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Keith Thompson ("Thompson") appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant Miami-Dade County in Thompson's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
In December of 1999, Thompson alleges that he was the victim of inmate-on-inmate violence while he was an incarcerated in the Miami-Dade County Detention Center. He brought suit against, inter alia, Miami-Dade County, claiming that the County violated his Eighth Amendment rights to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. On cross-motions for summary judgment, the district court granted MiamiDade County's motion and denied Thompson's motion.
We review a district court's grant of summary judgment de novo, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. Wilson v. B/E Aerospace, Inc., 376 F.3d 1079, 1085 (11th Cir.2004). Summary judgment is appropriate when "there is no genuine issue was to any material fact and . the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c).
We have carefully reviewed the record, the briefs of the parties, and the order of the district court on summary judgment. Construing the evidence in the light most favorable to Thompson, it is clear that he has failed to present any genuine issues of material fact. The allegations raised and the evidence presented does not state a violation of the Eighth Amendment on the part of Miami-Dade county, and the county was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Therefore, the well-reasoned opinion of the district court is
AFFIRMED.