David James v. Eric Cheatham, No. 20-1175 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Colloton, Gruender and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - Prisoner civil rights. The district court did not err in deeming defendants' statement of issues admitted, pursuant to local rule; order granting defendants' motion for summary judgment affirmed without comment. [ August 17, 2020 ]
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 20-1175 ___________________________ David N. James lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Eric Cheatham, Officer, North Little Rock Police Department; Mike Davis, Chief of Police, North Little Rock Police Department (Originally named as Doe) lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________ Submitted: August 7, 2020 Filed: August 18, 2020 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Arkansas inmate David James appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment. 1 The Honorable Kristine G. Baker, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in deeming defendants’ statement of facts admitted, pursuant to a local rule. See Nw. Bank & Tr. Co. v. First Ill. Nat’l Bank, 354 F.3d 721, 725 (8th Cir. 2003) (reviewing for abuse of discretion district court’s application of its local rules); see also Reasonover v. St. Louis Cty., 447 F.3d 569, 579 (8th Cir. 2006) (district courts have broad discretion enforcing local rules). Having carefully reviewed the record, we further conclude the district court did not err in granting summary judgment. See Woodworth v. Hulshof, 891 F.3d 1083, 1088 (8th Cir. 2018) (reviewing de novo grant of summary judgment). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -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.
