Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves an appeal by a plaintiff in a prison civil rights and tort suit filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against multiple defendants, contesting the district court's summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The plaintiff's claims included excessive force, deliberate indifference to medical needs, and failure to train and supervise, all of which were dismissed by the district court. The excessive force claim was deemed time-barred under Oklahoma's two-year statute of limitations, with the court rejecting the plaintiff's argument for a 'constructive filing' date. The court affirmed that neither version of the constructive filing principle applied, as the defective pleading was returned for noncompliance. The court found insufficient evidence to support the remaining claims, noting that prison logs and medical records contradicted the plaintiff's assertions. The plaintiff's attempt to amend the pleading was also rejected, as it was unrelated to the original incident and filed without the necessary court order. The denial of the motion to recuse the district judge was upheld, and all outstanding motions on appeal were denied. The court's decision affirms the district court's judgment, with no binding precedent set, and the mandate issued immediately.
Legal Issues Addressed
Citation of Unpublished Opinions in the Tenth Circuitsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Unpublished opinions can be cited if they have persuasive value on a material issue and are properly furnished to the court and parties.
Reasoning: Unpublished opinions in the Tenth Circuit may be cited if they have persuasive value on a material issue, provided a copy is attached to the citing document or furnished to the court and all parties during oral argument.
Denial of Motion for Recusalsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirmed the denial of the motion to recuse the district court judge based on the district court's reasoning.
Reasoning: The denial of the plaintiff's motion to recuse the district court judge is affirmed based on the district court's reasoning.
Relation Back of Amended Pleadingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The plaintiff's attempt to use a supplemental complaint as the controlling statement was denied as it was unrelated and filed without a court order.
Reasoning: An amended pleading requires a court order to be effective, which the district court did not provide for the plaintiff's motion to amend.
Statute of Limitations and Constructive Filingsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The plaintiff's excessive force claim was dismissed as time-barred, and the court found that the constructive filing principle did not apply.
Reasoning: The district court dismissed the excessive force claim as time-barred under Oklahoma’s two-year statute of limitations... The constructive filing principle does not apply in this case.
Summary Judgment under 42 U.S.C. § 1983subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court upheld summary judgment for the defendants, finding insufficient evidence to support the plaintiff's claims of excessive force and deliberate indifference.
Reasoning: The court examined an appeal regarding a summary judgment favoring the defendants in a prison civil rights/tort suit filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law.