Court Opinion

ID: 2964446
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:25:44.143768+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:01:57.452290
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1537

                                   KEVIN M. CASTRO,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

             UNITED STATES DEPT. OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

                 [Hon. Francis J. Boyle, Senior U.S. District Judge]
                                         __________________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                          Boudin and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                 ____________________

            Kevin M. Castro on brief pro se.
            _______________
            Jean A.  Boulanger and Capaldi &  Boulanger on  brief for appellee
            __________________     ____________________
        Coventry Housing Authority.
            Marc DeSisto, Kathleen M. Powers and  DeSisto Law Offices on brief
            ____________  __________________      ___________________
        for appellee Barry Yeaw, in  his capacity as Treasurer of the  Town of
        Coventry.

                                 ____________________

                                   November 7, 1996
                                 ____________________

                      Per Curiam.   Having reviewed the parties'  briefs,
                      __________

            we summarily  affirm the  judgment below on  the ground  that

            appellant has  made no developed  argument for reversal.   We

            add  that  the   individual  police  officers   who  arrested

            appellant were never made parties to the instant lawsuit, and

            that the Town  of Coventry may  not be  held liable under  42

            U.S.C.   1983 on a theory of respondeat superior.  See Monell
                                         __________ ________   ___ ______

            v. New  York City  Dep't of  Soc. Servs.,  436 U.S. 658,  691
               _____________________________________

            (1978).   In addition, based on his filings below, it appears

            as  if  the  only  damages  appellant  sought  were  punitive

            damages.   Such damages are  not available under  42 U.S.C.  

            1983  against  either  the   Town  or  the  Coventry  Housing

            Authority.  See City  of Newport v. Fact Concerts,  Inc., 453
                        ___ ________________    ____________________

            U.S. 247, 271 (1981); Adler  v Lincoln Housing Authority, 623
                                  _____    _________________________

            A.2d 20, 21 n.1 (R.I. 1993).

                      Affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
                      _________  ___

                                         -2-