Justin Eoff v. Keith Mallett, No. 21-3158 (8th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Colloton, Gruender, and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - Prisoner civil rights. Plaintiff waived his challenge to the jury's award of damages by failing to request a new trial; plaintiff has not shown that the damages awarded resulted in a plain injustice or a shocking result.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-3158 ___________________________ Justin R. Eoff llllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Keith Mallett, CO, Cummins Unit, ADC lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee Patrick Pierre, Sergeant, Cummins Unit, ADC (originally named as Pierre) lllllDefendant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Pine Bluff ____________ Submitted: November 28, 2022 Filed: December 2, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Arkansas inmate Justin Eoff appeals the judgment entered by the district court1 following a favorable jury verdict in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action asserting claims of excessive force. On appeal, he challenges the amount of nominal and punitive damages awarded him by the jury. After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that Eoff waived his challenge to the jury verdict by failing to request a new trial. See Kozlov v. Associated Wholesale Grocers, Inc., 818 F.3d 380, 391 (8th Cir. 2016) (concluding an inadequate jury award challenge is waived by failing to request a new trial). We also conclude that Eoff has not shown that the damages awarded resulted in a plain injustice or shocking result. See id.; Westcott v. Crinklaw, 133 F.3d 658, 662 (8th Cir. 1998) (holding that, absent exceptional circumstances like “plain injustice” or a “monstrous” or “shocking” result, the adequacy of a jury verdict must first be presented to the trial court in a new trial motion to preserve the issue for appellate review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -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.
