Edward Thurman v. Queen, No. 17-1948 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Gruender, Murphy and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - Prisoner Civil Rights. Defendants' judgment affirmed without comment. [ January 04, 2018
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 17-1948 ___________________________ Edward Thurman lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Queen, Sergeant, NCU; Downing, Lieutenant, NCU; Spurlock, Sergeant, NCU; Stephen Williams, Warden, NCU; Billy Inman, Deputy Warden, NCU; Keith Day, Building Mayor; Dexter Payne, Deputy Director, ADC; Barbara Williams, Inmate Grievance Supervisor, ADC; John Doe, Corporal, NCU lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Batesville ____________ Submitted: December 21, 2017 Filed: January 5, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Arkansas Department of Correction inmate Edward Thurman appeals after the district court1 adversely disposed of all of his claims, including dismissing some of his claims without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Also before the panel are Thurman’s motions for appointment of counsel and for admission and production of documents. After careful review, we conclude that the district court appropriately disposed of Thurman’s claims. See, e.g., King v. Iowa Dep’t of Corr., 598 F.3d 1051, 1052 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing de novo dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Thurman’s pending motions as moot. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable D. P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Beth Deere, United States Magistrate 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.
