Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Craig Miles Goodwin, A/K/A Curtis Meyer v. Harold Carmel, Dr. Albert O. Singleton, Iii, M.D. Mary Lou Judiscak Lou Brothers Ken Tafoya
Citations: 107 F.3d 20; 1997 WL 43519; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 6872Docket: 96-1084
Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit; February 3, 1997; Federal Appellate Court
Craig Miles Goodwin, also known as Curtis Meyer, appeals an order from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado that granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants Harold Carmel, Dr. Albert O. Singleton III, MaryLou Judiscak, Lou Brothers, and Ken Tafoya. The appeal concerns allegations of civil rights violations stemming from claims of denial of access to the courts. Goodwin asserts that his access was impeded because his legal materials were confiscated, he was unable to mail legal documents, he could not use legal books for research, and while he had consultations with a legal consultant, he was dissatisfied with that assistance and did not receive lawyer services. However, the court found that Goodwin failed to demonstrate any specific adverse consequences resulting from these alleged deprivations, such as missing filing deadlines or being barred from pursuing legal actions. The appeal was submitted without oral argument, and the court affirmed the district court's decision, agreeing with the magistrate judge's recommendations that Goodwin's claims were inconsequential and did not rise to a constitutional level, referencing the precedent set in Lewis v. Casey. The order and judgment is not binding precedent except under certain legal doctrines, and the citation of such orders is generally discouraged unless specific conditions are met.