Filed: Apr. 20, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 05-3166 _ Jerome J. Little, II, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Arkansas. Frank Atkinson; James Rush; Sebastian * [UNPUBLISHED] County; Unknown Defendants, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: March 17, 2006 Filed: April 20, 2006 _ Before WOLLMAN and RILEY, Circuit Judges, and ROSENBAUM,1 District Judge. _ PER CURIAM. Jerome J. Little II appeals from the district court’s2 dismi
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 05-3166 _ Jerome J. Little, II, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Arkansas. Frank Atkinson; James Rush; Sebastian * [UNPUBLISHED] County; Unknown Defendants, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: March 17, 2006 Filed: April 20, 2006 _ Before WOLLMAN and RILEY, Circuit Judges, and ROSENBAUM,1 District Judge. _ PER CURIAM. Jerome J. Little II appeals from the district court’s2 dismis..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 05-3166
___________
Jerome J. Little, II, *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Western District of Arkansas.
Frank Atkinson; James Rush; Sebastian * [UNPUBLISHED]
County; Unknown Defendants, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: March 17, 2006
Filed: April 20, 2006
___________
Before WOLLMAN and RILEY, Circuit Judges, and ROSENBAUM,1 District Judge.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Jerome J. Little II appeals from the district court’s2 dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 conditions of confinement claim. For reversal, Little argues that the clear
weight of the evidence does not support the judgment. Having carefully reviewed the
1
The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, Chief Judge, United States District
Court for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation.
2
The Honorable Beverly Stites Jones, United States Magistrate Judge for the
Western District of Arkansas, to whom this case was referred for final disposition by
consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the district court’s findings of fact are
not clearly erroneous and that the evidence presented supports the district court’s
judgment.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment on the basis of the district court’s
thorough memorandum opinion. See 8th Cir. Rule 47B.
______________________________
-2-