Filed: Aug. 21, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: _ No. 95-4067 _ Mark S. Moore, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Sam Smith; Leonard Edwards; * Eastern District of Missouri. Henry Reese, Jr.; Victor * Stuard; Unknown Carey; Janet * [UNPUBLISHED] Everett; Jesse Harris; Joe * Stewart; Dave Kovac; Julian * Boyd, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: August 5, 1996 Filed: August 21, 1996 _ Before BOWMAN, MAGILL, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Mark S. Moore appeals from the decision of the District Cou
Summary: _ No. 95-4067 _ Mark S. Moore, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Sam Smith; Leonard Edwards; * Eastern District of Missouri. Henry Reese, Jr.; Victor * Stuard; Unknown Carey; Janet * [UNPUBLISHED] Everett; Jesse Harris; Joe * Stewart; Dave Kovac; Julian * Boyd, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: August 5, 1996 Filed: August 21, 1996 _ Before BOWMAN, MAGILL, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Mark S. Moore appeals from the decision of the District Cour..
More
___________ No. 95-4067 ___________ Mark S. Moore, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Sam Smith; Leonard Edwards; * Eastern District of Missouri. Henry Reese, Jr.; Victor * Stuard; Unknown Carey; Janet * [UNPUBLISHED] Everett; Jesse Harris; Joe * Stewart; Dave Kovac; Julian * Boyd, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: August 5, 1996 Filed: August 21, 1996 ___________ Before BOWMAN, MAGILL, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Mark S. Moore appeals from the decision of the District Court1 granting summary judgment to various employees of the St. Louis City Jail in Moore's civil rights action concerning a misconduct report he received for passing a marijuana cigarette to another inmate. 1 The Honorable Donald J. Stohr, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the decision of the District Court is correct and that an opinion from this Court would have no precedential value. Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -2-
