Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Albert Reece v. St. Louis, 99-2802 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 99-2802 Visitors: 29
Filed: Oct. 01, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-2802 _ Albert Reece, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern St. Louis Psychiatric Rehabilitation * District of Missouri. Center; Mario Carrera, Dr.; Karol Kiel; * Allen Blake; Roberta Gardine; Beverly * [UNPUBLISHED] Buscemi, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: September 23, 1999 Filed: October 1, 1999 _ Before LOKEN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Albert Reece appeals the di
More
                     United States Court of Appeals
                           FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   ___________

                                   No. 99-2802
                                   ___________

Albert Reece,                             *
                                          *
                    Appellant,            *
                                          *
      v.                                  * Appeal from the United States
                                          * District Court for the Eastern
St. Louis Psychiatric Rehabilitation      * District of Missouri.
Center; Mario Carrera, Dr.; Karol Kiel; *
Allen Blake; Roberta Gardine; Beverly *          [UNPUBLISHED]
Buscemi,                                  *
                                          *
                    Appellees.            *
                                     ___________

                           Submitted: September 23, 1999
                               Filed: October 1, 1999
                                  ___________

Before LOKEN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.
                           ___________

PER CURIAM.

      Albert Reece appeals the district court's order dismissing Reece's complaint
under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B). Having considered the record and Reece's arguments
on appeal, we conclude Reece's complaint failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. ยง
1983, because the complaint contained no specific allegations linking any of the
appellees to any deprivation of Reece's rights. We thus affirm the district court. See
8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.

      Attest:

               CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.




                              -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer