Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Timothy Scott FREEMAN Plaintiff - Appellant v. CORIZON HEALTH, INC.; William Ingram, Doctor Defendants - Appellees Corizon Medical Staff; Polk County Jail Staff; Sara Doe Defendants
[Unpublished]
Federal inmate Timothy Freeman appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find the district court judge did not err in failing to recuse himself sua sponte, see Fletcher v. Conoco Pipe Line Co., 323 F.3d 661, 663, 665 (8th Cir. 2003) (applying plain-error standard where recusal claim was not raised below, and noting an adverse ruling without clear showing of bias insufficient basis for disqualification); and, as Freeman had no constitutional right to counsel in this civil case, his remedy for any inadequate assistance of counsel is a legal malpractice suit, not reversal of the judgment, see Glick v. Henderson, 855 F.2d 536, 541 (8th Cir. 1988) (holding no claim of ineffective assistance of appointed counsel in § 1983 action exists because there is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in civil case; remedy was malpractice suit against attorney rather than a new trial). Finally, we conclude Freeman waived any arguments as to the viability of his claims. See Doe v. Fort Zumwalt R-II Sch. Dist., 920 F.3d 1184, 1191 (8th Cir. 2019) (holding claim waiver where appellant did not challenge district court’s rationale or entry of summary judgment).
The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
FOOTNOTES
1. The Honorable John A. Jarvey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.
PER CURIAM.
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.
Docket No: No. 19-1125
Decided: October 04, 2019
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)