Filed: Apr. 16, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-2759 _ William Eugene Dunn; Sherry Lyn * Steffens Cavaness, * * Appellants, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri Louis Dewayne Helton; Curtis Davis; * Frank Ciliberto, * {UNPUBLISHED} * Appellees. * _ Submitted: April 6, 1998 Filed: April 16, 1998 _ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. William Eugene Dunn and Sherry Lyn Steffens Cavaness appeal from
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-2759 _ William Eugene Dunn; Sherry Lyn * Steffens Cavaness, * * Appellants, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri Louis Dewayne Helton; Curtis Davis; * Frank Ciliberto, * {UNPUBLISHED} * Appellees. * _ Submitted: April 6, 1998 Filed: April 16, 1998 _ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. William Eugene Dunn and Sherry Lyn Steffens Cavaness appeal from ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 97-2759
___________
William Eugene Dunn; Sherry Lyn *
Steffens Cavaness, *
*
Appellants, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Eastern District of Missouri
Louis Dewayne Helton; Curtis Davis; *
Frank Ciliberto, * {UNPUBLISHED}
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: April 6, 1998
Filed: April 16, 1998
___________
Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
William Eugene Dunn and Sherry Lyn Steffens Cavaness appeal from the final
judgment entered in the District Court1 for the Eastern District of Missouri following
an adverse jury verdict in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon a careful review of the
record and the parties& submissions on appeal, we believe the district court did not err
1
The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
in granting defendant Louis Dewayne Helton&s motion in limine, in denying Dunn&s and
Cavaness&s motion in limine, in granting judgment as a matter of law to defendants
Curtis Davis and Frank Ciliberto on Dunn&s and Cavaness&s “failure to intervene”
claim, and in denying Dunn&s and Cavaness&s motion for a new trial. Accordingly, we
affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
-2-