Anthony Moore v. Timothy Schuetzle, No. 05-1465 (8th Cir. 2006)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Prisoner case -Prisoner civil rights. Defendants' summary judgment on prisoner's Section 1983 affirmed without comment.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 05-1465 ___________ Anthony James Moore, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Timothy Schuetzle,; Elaine Little; * Robert Coad; Denise Senger; Kathleen * Bachmeier, individually and in their * official capacities, * * Appellees, * * Barbara Gross, individually and in her * official capacity, * * Defendant, * * Cordell Stromme; Mirna Stromme, * individually and in their official * capacities, * * Appellees, * * Justin Heidt; Dan Gleich, individually * and in their official capacities, * * Defendants, * * Jeff Hostetter, Dr.; John Hagan, * Dr., individually and in their official * capacities, * * Appellees, * Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota. [UNPUBLISHED] Tugrul Kihtir, Dr., individually and in his official capacity, Defendant. * * * * ___________ Submitted: March 23, 2006 Filed: March 27, 2006 ___________ Before MELLOY, FAGG, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. North Dakota inmate Anthony James Moore appeals the district court s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 lawsuit. Having conducted de novo review of the record and considered the parties arguments, we find no basis for reversing the district court s well-reasoned opinion. See Murphy v. Mo. Dep t of Corr., 372 F.3d 979, 982 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 991 (2004) (standard of review). We also find no abuse of discretion in the district court s denial of Moore s requests for an independent medical examination, see Ledford v. Sullivan, 105 F.3d 354, 358-59 (7th Cir. 1997) (given particular factual issues in case, determining deliberate indifference was not so complicated that expert was required to establish inmate s case), and the appointment of a medical expert, cf. Sanden v. Mayo Clinic, 495 F.2d 221, 225 (8th Cir. 1974) (manner and conditions of court-ordered medical examination, and designation of person to conduct examination, are vested in sound discretion of district court). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Moore s pending motions. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of North Dakota. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
