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)
23-3019•Serandon Ramon Starling v. Cantrell Bass, Lt., Tucker Max, ADC; Antonio Johnson, Major, Tucker Max, ADC
23-3019Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitJan 30, 2026
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 25-1702
___________________________
Serandon Ramon Starling
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Cantrell Bass, Lt., Tucker Max, ADC; Antonio Johnson, Major, Tucker Max, ADC
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central
____________
Submitted: January 14, 2026
Filed: January 21, 2026
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SMITH, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Serandon Starling appeals following the district court’s1 adverse grant of
summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Following a de novo review, we
1The Honorable Patricia S. Harris, United States Magistrate Judge for the
Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by
consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
conclude that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment. See
Johnson v. Carroll, 658 F.3d 819, 825 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.