Cecil R. Patterson, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Bill Noland and Tom Miller, Defendants-appellees, 37 F.3d 1510 (10th Cir. 1994)
Annotate this CaseBefore SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, McKAY and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT1
The parties have agreed that this case may be submitted for decision on the briefs. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.2. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Mr. Patterson appeals the granting of summary judgment by the district court on his civil rights claims. "We review the grant or denial of summary judgment de novo. We apply the same legal standard used by the district court under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)." Applied Genetics Int'l. Inc. v. First Affiliated Sec., Inc., 912 F.2d 1238, 1241 (10th Cir. 1990) (citing Barnson v. United States, 816 F.2d 549, 552 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 896 (1987), and Osgood v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir. 1988).
Upon reviewing the record, we find that there are no genuine issues of material fact which would entitle Mr.Patterson to relief. The Defendants-Appellees are entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
AFFIRMED.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of the court's General Order filed November 29, 1993. 151 F.R.D. 470
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.
