Lawrence Conrad LaDeaux v. Woodbury County Jail; Unknown Woodbury County Jail Staff

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 21-1672
___________________________
Lawrence Conrad LaDeaux
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Woodbury County Jail; Unknown Woodbury County Jail Staff
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Northern District of Iowa - Western
____________
Submitted: August 30, 2021
Filed: September 3, 2021
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SHEPHERD, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Lawrence LaDeaux appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary
judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon de novo review, we affirm. See
1The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern
District of Iowa.

-- 1 of 2 --

Johnson v. Outboard Marine Corp., 172 F.3d 531, 535 (8th Cir. 1999) (standard of
review; this court may affirm on any basis supported by record). We find that
LaDeaux’s claim against the Woodbury County Jail failed, as the Jail was not a legal
entity subject to suit. See Owens v. Scott Cnty. Jail, 328 F.3d 1026, 1027 (8th Cir.
2003) (per curiam) (affirming grant of summary judgment to jail, as county jails are
not legal entities amenable to suit). As to the claims against the unnamed Jail staff,
the complaint stated only official-capacity claims, and thus raised claims only against
Woodbury County itself. See Johnson, 172 F.3d at 535 (in order to sue public official
in his individual capacity, plaintiff must expressly and unambiguously state so in
pleadings; official-capacity suit against public employee is merely suit against public
employer). As LaDeaux neither alleged nor presented evidence showing that the
alleged denial of medical care was due to any county policy or custom, we conclude
that summary judgment was proper. See Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S.
658, 694 (1978) (municipality may only be liable when constitutional violation at
issue was committed pursuant to municipality’s policy or custom); Johnson, 172 F.3d
at 536 (affirming grant of summary judgment where plaintiffs failed to allege facts
or produce evidence showing that alleged constitutional violation was result of
county policy or custom).
The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --