Allen Huenefeld v. Michael Carr, et al, No. 10-1780 (8th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil Case - civil rights. District court's grant of summary judgment was warranted. Huenefeld did not make required showing summary judgment was premature.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 10-1780 ___________ Allen Huenefeld, Appellant, v. Michael Carr; Bill Elam, Appellees. * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Northern * District of Iowa. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * ___________ Submitted: September 20, 2010 Filed: October 5, 2010 ___________ Before BYE, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Iowa inmate Allen Huenefeld appeals the district court s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 action. Having conducted careful de novo review of the record, see Mack v. Dillon, 594 F.3d 620, 622 (8th Cir. 2010) (per curiam) (standard of review), we agree with the district court that summary judgment was warranted. Further, Huenefeld did not make the required showing below that summary judgment was premature; and his complaints on appeal regarding the 1 The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. effectiveness of his appointed counsel are not a basis for reversal, see Taylor v. Dickel, 293 F.3d 427, 431 (8th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -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.
