Opinion of the Court — Lawless v. Muskingum County

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: June 6, 2002
Case: Lawless v. Muskingum County
Case status: Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

ORDER Robert J. Lawless appeals a district court order dismissing his civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . The ease has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(l), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. RApp. P. 34(a). Seeking monetary relief, Lawless sued Muskingum County (Ohio) and numerous county officials, alleging that the defendants violated his constitutional rights when he was convicted of a felony in 1985 and indicted on another charge in 1999. Lawless also alleged that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment when he was jailed for two days. With the exception of Lawless’s Eighth Amendment medical claim, the district court dismissed his claims for failure to state a claim The court subsequently granted summary judgment to the defendants on Lawless’s Eighth Amendment medical claim and dismissed the case. Lawless has filed a timely appeal. The defendants initially argue that Lawless is limited on appeal to challenging the district court’s grant of summary judgment because he only listed the court…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.