BARGO v. NAYLOR (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Jerome Allen BARGO Plaintiff-Appellant v. Raymond NAYLOR, Administrator of Internal Affairs, Arkansas Department of Correction; Randy Watson, Warden, Varner Unit; Jeremy Andrews, Deputy Warden, Varner Unit; Tony McHan, Deputy Warden of Security, Varner Unit; Thomas Rowland, C.V.S.A. Examiner, Internal Affairs; Keith Waddle, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Internal Affairs; Gladys Evans, Supervisor of Library, Varner Unit Defendants-Appellees
Jerome Allen Bargo, ADC #75423 and all other similarly situated inmates Plaintiff-Appellant Marion Gene Westerman, ADC #121452 and all other similarly situated inmates; Robert Harold Munnerlyn, ADC #86196 and all other similarly situated inmates Plaintiffs v. Wendy Kelley, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction; Randall Watson, Warden, Varner Unit Defendants Jeremy Andrews, Deputy Warden, Varner Unit Defendant-Appellee Raymond Naylor, Disciplinary Hearing Administrator, ADC; Thomas Roland, Internal Affairs Officer, ADC Defendants Keith Waddle, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, ADC Defendant-Appellee Gladys Evans, Supervisor, Varner Unit Library Defendant Jimmy Phillips, Correctional Captain, Varner Unit Field Utility and Hoe Squad Defendant-Appellee Ojiugo Iko, Doctor, Corizon Inc. Defendant

No. 17-2376, No. 18-1340

Decided: January 03, 2019

Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

Jerome Allen Bargo, Pro Se Maryna O. Jackson, Attorney General's Office, Little Rock, AR, for Defendants-Appellees

[Unpublished]

Jerome Bargo appeals from the adverse judgments in his related 42 U.S.C. § 1983 actions. In the case underlying appeal No. 18-1340, the District Court ¹ disposed of the action in pre-service dismissal and summary judgment orders. After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude there is no basis for reversal. See Peterson v. Kopp, 754 F.3d 594, 598 (8th Cir. 2014) (reviewing de novo the grant of summary judgment); Strandlund v. Hawley, 532 F.3d 741, 745 (8th Cir. 2008) (reviewing for abuse of discretion the dismissal of misjoined parties); Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (reviewing de novo pre-service dismissal).

In the case underlying appeal No. 17-2376, the District Court ² dismissed the action based on res judicata and failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record, and we conclude that dismissal was appropriate. See Kelly v. City of Omaha, 813 F.3d 1070, 1075 (8th Cir. 2016) (reviewing de novo the grant of a motion to dismiss for failure to state claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Laase v. Cty. of Isanti, 638 F.3d 853, 856 (8th Cir. 2011) (“We review de novo the grant of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim based on res judicata.”).

We affirm in both cases.

FOOTNOTES

1. The Honorable Kristine G. Baker, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Judge Jerome T. Kearney, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

2. The Honorable James M. Moody, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Patricia S. Harris, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law