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)
24-2830•Jimmy Jacoby Carr v. Michael Roberts, Police Officer; Scott Hauptmann, Correctional Officer
24-2830Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitNov 26, 2025
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-3246
___________________________
Jimmy Jacoby Carr
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Michael Roberts, Police Officer; Scott Hauptmann, Correctional Officer
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
Pottawattamie County Jail; Council Bluffs Police Department; Anamosa State
Penitentiary; Fort Dodge Correctional Facility
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa - Central
____________
Submitted: October 29,2025
Filed: November 3, 2025
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
-- 1 of 2 --
PER CURIAM.
Iowa prisoner Jimmy Carr appeals following the district court’s1 adverse grant
of summary judgment in this civil rights action. Upon careful review, we find Carr
waived his claims against Scott Hauptmann by failing to make any meaningful
argument in his opening brief challenging the grant of summary judgment for
Hauptmann. See Jenkins v. Winter, 540 F.3d 742, 751 (8th Cir. 2008) (where there
is no meaningful argument on claim in opening brief, it is deemed waived). For the
reasons stated by the district court, we also conclude the grant of summary judgment
for Michael Roberts was proper. See Fair v. Norris, 480 F.3d 865, 869 (8th Cir.
2007) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
1The Honorable William P. Kelly, United States Magistrate Judge for the
Southern District of Iowa, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by
consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
-2-
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.