Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Kinsey Gordon William Lee Carr Kevin Daniel Ross Troy A. Mintle v. Steve Faber, Lt.

Kinsey Gordon William Lee Carr Kevin Daniel Ross Troy A. Mintle v. Steve Faber, Lt., 963 F.2d 187 (8th Cir. 1992)

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1992-04-29
Topic
litigation

McMILLIAN, Circuit Judge. Lieutenant Steve Faber appeals from a final judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, after a bench trial, finding him liable pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violating the rights of Kinsey Gordon, William Lee Carr, Kevin Daniel Ross, and Troy A. Mintle under the cruel and unusual punishments clause of the Eighth Amendment. Gordon v. Faber, No.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Kinsey Gordon William Lee Carr Kevin Daniel Ross Troy A. Mintle v. Steve Faber, Lt.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
1 opinion
GORDON v. FABER,963 F.2d 187(8th Cir. 1992)
KINSEY GORDON; WILLIAM LEE CARR; KEVIN DANIEL ROSS; TROY A. MINTLE,
APPELLEES, v. STEVE FABER, LT., APPELLANT.
No. 91-3731.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted April 16, 1992.
Decided April 29, 1992.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa; John A. Jarvey, Judge.
Kristin Wright Ensign, Des Moines, Iowa, argued (Bonnie J. Campbell and Kristin W. Ensign, on the brief), for appellant.

Anna Wirt O'Flaherty, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, argued (Anna Wirt O'Flaherty and Thomas J. O'Flaherty, on brief), for appellees.Page 188
Before McMILLIAN and BOWMAN, Circuit Judges, and EISELE,fn*Senior District Judge.
McMILLIAN, Circuit Judge.
[1] Lieutenant Steve Faber appeals from a final judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, after a bench trial, finding him liable pursuant to42 U.S.C. § 1983for violating the rights of Kinsey Gordon, William Lee Carr, Kevin Daniel Ross, and Troy A. Mintle under the cruel and unusual punishments clause of the Eighth Amendment.Gordonv. Faber,No. C 90-0044, et al. (N.D. Iowa Nov. 5, 1991). Appellant is a security officer and appellees are inmates at the Iowa Men's Reformatory in Anamosa, Iowa. The district court assessed compensatory damages of $75.00 per appellee and ordered appellant to pay costs. Slip op. at 9. For reversal, appellant argues, among other things, that the district court clearly erred in finding that the deprivation suffered by appellees was sufficiently grave to meet the objective component of cruel and unusual punishment. We retain jurisdiction over this case and remand the case to the district court with directions. We direct the district court to clarify its findings as to whether the objective component of cruel and unusual punishment has been satisfied in light of the Supreme Court's recent decisions inHudson v. McMillian,___ U.S. ___, ___-___,112 S.Ct. 995,999-1000,117 L.Ed.2d 156(1992) (to establish objective component of a conditions-of-confinement claim, deprivation must be "extreme" and must deny "minimal civilized measure of life's necessities"), andWilson v. Seiter,___ U.S. ___, ___,111 S.Ct. 2321,2324,115 L.Ed.2d 271(1991) (same).
  1. The Honorable G. Thomas Eisele, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, sitting by designation. ↩