Filed: Apr. 12, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 09-2002 _ Douglas Hiram Coleman, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Duluth Police Department, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Defendant, * District of Minnesota. * Chief Gordon Ramsay; Officer Tinsley, * [UNPUBLISHED] and other unidentified Duluth Police * Officers, both individually and in * their official capacity; Ford Du Luth * Casino-Security; Unidentified Security * Officers, both individually and in their * offici
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 09-2002 _ Douglas Hiram Coleman, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Duluth Police Department, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Defendant, * District of Minnesota. * Chief Gordon Ramsay; Officer Tinsley, * [UNPUBLISHED] and other unidentified Duluth Police * Officers, both individually and in * their official capacity; Ford Du Luth * Casino-Security; Unidentified Security * Officers, both individually and in their * officia..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 09-2002
___________
Douglas Hiram Coleman, *
*
Appellant, *
*
v. *
*
Duluth Police Department, * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the
Defendant, * District of Minnesota.
*
Chief Gordon Ramsay; Officer Tinsley, * [UNPUBLISHED]
and other unidentified Duluth Police *
Officers, both individually and in *
their official capacity; Ford Du Luth *
Casino-Security; Unidentified Security *
Officers, both individually and in their *
official capacity; Jim Urness, Manager/ *
Chief of Security, both individually and *
in his official capacity, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: April 7, 2010
Filed: April 12, 2010
___________
Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Douglas Coleman appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of motions to
dismiss and for summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Following careful
de novo review of the record, we find no basis for reversal. Accordingly, we affirm.
See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Coleman’s pending motion.
______________________________
1
The Honorable Donovan W. Frank, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Raymond
L. Erickson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
-2-