The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
16-2654•William R. Cody v. Ashley McDonald
16-2654Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitMay 31, 2018
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 17-2611
___________________________
William R. Cody
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Ashley McDonald; Tim Meirose; Darin Young; Heather Bowers; Jessica Stevens;
Kayla Tinker; Dr. Mary Carpenter, MD; Jennifer Wagner; Linda Miller-Hunoff;
Steve Baker, in their individual and official capacities
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of South Dakota - Sioux Falls
____________
Submitted: April 23, 2018
Filed: May 7, 2018
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
-- 1 of 2 --
South Dakota inmate William R. Cody appeals following the adverse grant of
summary judgment by the District Court in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon de1
novo review, see Murchison v. Rogers, 779 F.3d 882, 886-87 (8th Cir. 2015)
(outlining summary judgment standard of review), we find no error in the grant of
summary judgment on the only claim at issue in the instant appeal, i.e., that
defendants denied Cody adequate legal materials or assistance to file an action based
on the denial of medical care. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.2
______________________________
The Honorable Roberto A. Lange, United States District Judge for the District1
of South Dakota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable
Veronica L. Duffy, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of South Dakota.
Cody has not filed a reply brief challenging appellees’ assertions that he has2
waived his other claims. See Hess v. Ables, 714 F.3d 1048, 1051 n.2 (8th Cir. 2013)
(claim is waived where this court is not briefed on why the dismissal of the claim was
improper).
-2-
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.