Rodney Lawson v. Hazel Vance (8th Cir. 2002)

Federal Circuits, 8th Cir. (July 26, 2002)

Docket number: 02-2057
Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/18501936
Id. vLex: VLEX-18501936

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

Text:

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-2057

Rodney Lawson, Appellant, v. Hazel Vance, Food Service Worker, Appellee.

Submitted: July 11, 2002

Filed: July 26, 2002

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and BOWMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Rodney Lawson brought a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim alleging his right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment was violated when Hazel Vance, a cook for the prison, slapped Lawson in the face. Vance claims Lawson frightened her and she threw up her hands, accidentally striking Lawson in the face. Following discovery, the district court

Western District of Missouri.

Having reviewed the record de novo and considered the facts and all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from them in the light most favorable to Lawson, we conclude the district court correctly granted summary judgment to Vance. Forrest v. Kraft Foods, Inc., 285 F.3d 688, 691 (8th Cir. 2002). To prove a claim of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, Lawson must show the force was applied maliciously and sadistically to cause harm, rather than in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore discipline. Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 6-7 (1992). Lawson must prove actual injury, and cannot recover for de minimus use of force unless the de minimus force is repugnant. Hudson, 503 U.S. at 9-10 (de minimus force repugnant to the conscience of mankind violates the Eighth Amendment); Cummings v. Malone, 995 F.2d 817, 822 (8th Cir. 1993) (proof of actual injury required). Assuming Vance slapped Lawson on purpose and without provocation, Lawson fails to show he was actually injured. Lawson was examined by a nurse an hour after the incident. There were no visible signs of injury, no symptoms, and Lawson did not complain of being hurt. VanceÂ’s slap is a de minimus use of force, and does not give rise to a constitutional claim. White v. Holmes, 21 F.3d 277, 279, 281 (8th Cir. 1994).

On appeal, Lawson claims he was slapped twice, not once, and that two slaps cannot be accidental. Because Lawson failed to raise this argument before the district court, we decline to consider it on appeal. Rheineck v. Hutchinson Tech., Inc., 261 F.3d 751, 758 (8th Cir. 2001). Besides, even if Vance purposely slapped Lawson twice without provocation, as Lawson claims, Lawson still fails to prove actual injury.

We thus reject LawsonÂ’s claims on appeal and affirm the district courtÂ’s grant of summary judgment to Vance. See 8th Cir. R. 47 B. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.

[UNPUBLISHED]

granted VanceÂ’s motion for summary judgment. Lawson appeals. The Honorable Nanette K. Laughrey, United States District Judge for the

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

Other documents:
Antonio M Clark Petitioner vs State of Florida Respondent 761 So 2d 323 2000 | 33 CFR 135.201 - Applicability. | duffey v duffey ohio 2002 | Edicto de notificacion de Acuerdo de la Comision Territorial de Urbanism... | Case of Tribunal Superior de Justicia Barcelona Cataluña Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo of June 18 1999 | Décision de la Commission du 16 décembre 2002 relative à la poursuite des essais et analyses comparatifs communautaires concernant les matériels de multiplication et les p... | case of tribunal superior de justicia - oviedo, asturias - sala de lo social, of april 19, 2002 | Informació Pública sobre la pèrdua del títol de Graduat Escolar del Sra MARIA F...