Filed: Jan. 21, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-10426 Summary Calendar STEVEN DALE FINCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus CLIFF WILLIAMS, Grand Prairie Police Officer, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (4:99-CV-803-Y) - January 21, 2002 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, AND BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Plaintiff-Appellant Steven Dale Finch, now Texas prisoner #1004856, appeals the summary-judgment dismissal
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-10426 Summary Calendar STEVEN DALE FINCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus CLIFF WILLIAMS, Grand Prairie Police Officer, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (4:99-CV-803-Y) - January 21, 2002 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, AND BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Plaintiff-Appellant Steven Dale Finch, now Texas prisoner #1004856, appeals the summary-judgment dismissal o..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-10426
Summary Calendar
STEVEN DALE FINCH,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CLIFF WILLIAMS, Grand Prairie
Police Officer,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
(4:99-CV-803-Y)
--------------------
January 21, 2002
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, AND BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff-Appellant Steven Dale Finch, now Texas prisoner
#1004856, appeals the summary-judgment dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 complaint in which he alleged that he was subjected to
excessive force during an arrest on a parole violation. As the
record contains several disputed material facts about what occurred
during Finch’s arrest, the summary judgment in favor of the
defendant is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED for further
proceedings. See Little v. Liquid Air Corp.,
37 F.3d 1069, 1075
(5th Cir. 1994) (en banc)
VACATED AND REMANDED.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.