Filed: Dec. 27, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 05-3888 _ Donald Joseph Bedard, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. State of Iowa; City of Urbandale; * Urbandale Police Department; Iowa * [UNPUBLISHED] Attorney General; Polk County * Attorney; Polk County Executive, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: December 19, 2006 Filed: December 27, 2006 _ Before SMITH, MAGILL, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Donald Josep
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 05-3888 _ Donald Joseph Bedard, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. State of Iowa; City of Urbandale; * Urbandale Police Department; Iowa * [UNPUBLISHED] Attorney General; Polk County * Attorney; Polk County Executive, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: December 19, 2006 Filed: December 27, 2006 _ Before SMITH, MAGILL, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Donald Joseph..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 05-3888
___________
Donald Joseph Bedard, *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Southern District of Iowa.
State of Iowa; City of Urbandale; *
Urbandale Police Department; Iowa * [UNPUBLISHED]
Attorney General; Polk County *
Attorney; Polk County Executive, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: December 19, 2006
Filed: December 27, 2006
___________
Before SMITH, MAGILL, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Donald Joseph Bedard appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary
judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Having conducted de novo review of the
record, see Wertish v. Krueger,
433 F.3d 1062, 1064 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of
1
The Honorable Charles R. Wolle, United States District Judge for the Southern
District of Iowa.
review), we find the district court’s analysis to be thorough and well reasoned, and we
reject Bedard’s arguments for reversal. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-