Charles Burgett v. Kansas City Board of Police, No. 16-4105 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Benton, Bowman and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil rights. Defendants' judgment on plaintiff's Section 1983 claims affirmed without comment.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-4105 ___________________________ Charles L. Burgett lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant Shelia Porter; Virgil Lienhard; Kansas City Area Transportation Authority; Police Officer Brent Cartwright lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees Patrick McInerney, in his official capacity as a member of the Board of Police Commissioners of Kansas City, Missouri, and in his individual capacity; Alvin Brooks, in his official capacity as a member of the Board of Police Commissioners of Kansas City, Missouri, and in his individual capacity; Angela Wasson-Hunt, in her official capacity as a member of the Board of Police Commissioners of Kansas City, Missouri, and in her individual capacity; Lisa Pelofsky, in her official capacity as a member of the Board of Police Commissioners of Kansas City, Missouri, and in her individual capacity; Mayor Sly James, in his official capacity as a member of the Board of Police Commissioners of Kansas City, Missouri, and in his individual capacity; Michael Rader, Current Board Commissioner, Board of Police Commissioner City of Kansas City lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: December 26, 2017 Filed: January 19, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BENTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Charles L. Burgett appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment, following remand, in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arising from an incident on a Kansas City Area Transportation Authority bus. Upon careful consideration of Burgett’s arguments for reversal, and de novo review of the record, see Murchison v. Rogers, 779 F.3d 882, 886-87 (8th Cir. 2015) (viewing evidence in light most favorable to nonmovant, and drawing all reasonable inferences in his favor), we agree with the district court that the remaining defendants satisfied their burden of demonstrating that there were no genuine issues of material fact for trial on Burgett’s Fourth Amendment and related conspiracy claims, or on his 42 U.S.C. § 2000d claim, against them. The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -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.
