Date: 05-09-2006

Case Style: Ellen Reasonover v. St. Louis County

Case Number: 04-3830

Judge: Riley

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on appeal from the Eastern District of Missouri, St. Louis County

Plaintiff's Attorney: Unknown

Defendant's Attorney: Unknown

Description:

Ellen Maria Reasonover (Reasonover) was convicted in 1983 of killing James Buckley (Buckley). Reasonover served over 16 years in prison, and was released in 1999 after her petition for writ of habeas corpus was granted. The habeas court found, in light of new evidence discovered and disclosed after Reasonover's conviction, it was more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have found Reasonover guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Reasonover v. Washington, 60 F. Supp. 2d 937 (E.D. Mo. 1999). Reasonover and her daughter, Charmelle Bufford (Bufford), now bring an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Missouri state law against many of the individuals and municipalities responsible for her conviction and incarceration. Their claims include (1) a section 1983 claim for malicious prosecution, false arrest, use of unreliable and fraudulent investigatory techniques, procurement of unreliable and fabricated evidence, and wrongful conviction and imprisonment; (2) a section 1983 claim for conspiracy; (3) a section 1983 claim for suppression of exculpatory evidence; (4) section 1983 claims against municipalities and counties for failure to train police officers; (5) a section 1983 claim for deprivation of associational rights and loss of family privacy; (6) a claim under Missouri state law for negligence resulting in wrongful incarceration and continued detention; (7) a state law claim for false arrest; (8) a state law claim for malicious prosecution; and (9) a state law claim for abuse of process. The district court 1 granted all of the defendants' separate motions for summary judgment, and Reasonover and Bufford appeal. We affirm the district court.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text of this opinion.

Outcome: In summary, we affirm the district court’s orders granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

Plaintiff's Experts: Unknown

Defendant's Experts: Unknown

Comments: None