Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
John M. Carter v. William Muldoon
Date: 10-21-2019
Case Number: 19-1019
Judge: Per Curiam
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on appeal from the District of Nebraska (Lancaster County)
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Call 918-582-6422 if you need help finding a civil rights lawyer in Lincoln, Nebraska
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
In this civil rights action, John M. Carter appeals following the district court’s1
adverse grant of summary judgment. Viewing the record in a light most favorable to
The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United 1 States District Judge for the
District of Nebraska.
Carter, we find that the district court properly granted summary judgment to
defendants William Muldoon and Dave Stolz in their individual capacities based on
a determination that they were entitled to qualified immunity. See Clark v. Clark, 926
F.3d 972, 977 (8th Cir. 2019) (de novo review). We also find no abuse of discretion
in the district court’s denial of Carter’s motion for recusal. See Fletcher v. Conoco
Pipe Line Co., 323 F.3d 661, 664 (8th Cir. 2003) (judge is presumed impartial, and
party seeking recusal bears substantial burden of showing otherwise); Moran v.
Clarke, 296 F.3d 638, 648 (8th Cir. 2002) (en banc) (standard of review). The
judgment is affirmed, see 8th Cir. R. 47B; and Carter’s motion to supplement the
record is denied.
In this civil rights action, John M. Carter appeals following the district court’s1
adverse grant of summary judgment. Viewing the record in a light most favorable to
The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United 1 States District Judge for the
District of Nebraska.
Carter, we find that the district court properly granted summary judgment to
defendants William Muldoon and Dave Stolz in their individual capacities based on
a determination that they were entitled to qualified immunity. See Clark v. Clark, 926
F.3d 972, 977 (8th Cir. 2019) (de novo review). We also find no abuse of discretion
in the district court’s denial of Carter’s motion for recusal. See Fletcher v. Conoco
Pipe Line Co., 323 F.3d 661, 664 (8th Cir. 2003) (judge is presumed impartial, and
party seeking recusal bears substantial burden of showing otherwise); Moran v.
Clarke, 296 F.3d 638, 648 (8th Cir. 2002) (en banc) (standard of review). The
judgment is affirmed, see 8th Cir. R. 47B; and Carter’s motion to supplement the
record is denied.
Outcome:
Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of John M. Carter v. William Muldoon?
The outcome was: Affirmed
Which court heard John M. Carter v. William Muldoon?
This case was heard in United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on appeal from the District of Nebraska (Lancaster County), NE. The presiding judge was Per Curiam.
Who were the attorneys in John M. Carter v. William Muldoon?
Plaintiff's attorney: Call 918-582-6422 if you need help finding a civil rights lawyer in Lincoln, Nebraska.
When was John M. Carter v. William Muldoon decided?
This case was decided on October 21, 2019.