Mary Beasley v. Arron Brown, No. 13-1552 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1552 MARY E. BEASLEY, Personal Darryl E. Beasley, Representative for Estate of Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ARRON BROWN; RENEE BROTHERS; ANTHONY HENDERSON; KENNETH KEPLEY, Captain, ANDERSON; OFFICER Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cv-00006-JAG-MHL) Submitted: September 24, 2013 Before NIEMEYER and Senior Circuit Judge. THACKER, Decided: Circuit September 26, 2013 Judges, and HAMILTON, Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David P. Morgan, CRAVENS & NOLL PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. William F. Etherington, Leslie A. Winneberger, BEALE, DAVIDSON, ETHERINGTON & MORRIS, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Mary E. Beasley ( Beasley ) appeals the district court s order granting Defendants motion for summary judgment in her civil action alleging Defendants used excessive force against her son, Darryl Beasley, in ยง 1983 (2006), resulting in his death. violation of 42 U.S.C. Beasley further asserted common law state claims of wrongful death and conspiracy. The district court concluded that Beasley failed to produce evidence establishing that Defendants conduct violated the decedent s constitutional rights and that, even if a violation occurred, Defendants actions were not so unreasonable as to place them outside the scope of qualified immunity. The district court further denied relief on Beasley s state law claims. This court reviews de novo a district court s order granting summary judgment. 607 (4th Cir. 2010). Robinson v. Clipse, 602 F.3d 605, Summary judgment shall be granted when there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Civ. P. 56(a). Fed. R. At the summary judgment stage, facts must be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party only if there is a genuine dispute as to those facts. Harris, 550 omitted). U.S. 372, 380 (2007) (internal Scott v. quotation marks A district court should grant summary judgment unless a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party 2 on the evidence presented. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 An U.S. motion 242, for 249 (1986). summary judgment otherwise will not properly be supported defeated by the existence of any factual dispute; [o]nly disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment. at 248. nor Id. Conclusory or speculative allegations do not suffice, does a mere scintilla of evidence in support of the nonmoving party s case. Thompson v. Potomac Elec. Power Co., 312 Cir. F.3d 645, 649 (4th 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted). We have reviewed the parties briefs and the materials submitted on appeal and conclude that the district court did not err in granting Defendants motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Beasley v. Brown, No. 3:12-cv-00006-JAG-MHL (E.D. Va. Mar. 27, 2013). facts and materials legal before We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
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.
