Ivie Harris, Jr. v. David Norwood, et al


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: William Jay Riley, Roger L. Wollman and Diana E. Murphy (UNPUBLISHED) [4420223] [16-1610]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-1610 ___________________________ Ivie Lee Harris, Jr. lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. David Norwood, Sheriff, Ouachita County; James Bolton, Lieutenant, Ouachita County; Douglas Wood, Jailer, Ouachita County; Andrew Tolleson, Jailer, Ouachita County; Anthony Grummer, Jailer, Ouachita County; Officer Lindsey lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - El Dorado ____________ Submitted: June 27, 2106 Filed: June 30, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before RILEY, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Ivie Harris appeals after the district court dismissed his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, concluding his claims were moot because he had requested only injunctive relief from the sheriff and staff members at the Ouachita County Detention Center, Appellate Case: 16-1610 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/30/2016 Entry ID: 4420223 and he was no longer incarcerated at the facility. Upon de novo review, we conclude that Harris’s claims were not moot, because his complaint also sought damages. In the “Relief” section of the form complaint Harris used, he placed checkmarks next to both “Compensatory damages” and “Punitive damages.”1 Accordingly, we reverse and remand the case for further proceedings. See Midwest Farmworker Emp’t & Training, Inc. v. United States Dep’t of Labor, 200 F.3d 1198, 1201 (8th Cir. 2000) (dismissal for mootness reviewed de novo). ______________________________ 1 Harris requested injunctive relief in the section asking him to identify “any other relief” he was seeking. -2- Appellate Case: 16-1610 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/30/2016 Entry ID: 4420223

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?