Keith Brown v. Paul K. Delo ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                                 _____________
    No. 95-2362EM
    _____________
    Keith E. Brown, also known as       *
    Keith Brown;                        *
    *
    Plaintiff-Appellant,     *
    *
    Andre Evans, also known as          *
    Andre Evans-Bey,                    *
    *
    Plaintiff,               *
    *
    v.                            *
    *   Appeal from the United States
    Paul K. Delo, Supt; Norma           *   District Court for the Eastern
    Lavran, Captain; Lonnie Salts,      *   District of Missouri.
    Lieutenant; Phillip Nixon,          *
    Sargeant; James McGinley,           *   [UNPUBLISHED]
    Sargeant; David McPeak, COI;        *
    Joseph Holloway, COI; Donald        *
    Beauchamp, COI; Lloyd Hodges,       *
    COI; Earnest Jarvis, COI;           *
    William Kitchell, COI; William      *
    Major, COII; Unknown Davis,         *
    COI; Greg Wilson; Fred Treece;      *
    Charles W. Harris, CSII; Karen      *
    Festenmaker; L. Rosenberg; Don      *
    Roper, Asst. Supt.,                 *
    *
    Defendants-Appellees.    *
    _____________
    Submitted:    June 7, 1996
    Filed: June 14, 1996
    _____________
    Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.
    _____________
    PER CURIAM.
    On appeal, Keith E. Brown, a Missouri inmate, challenges the amended
    judgment awarding nominal damages following a zero-damage jury award
    against two of the defendants in Brown's 42 U.S.C.
    § 1983 excessive force action.       Brown also contends the district court
    improperly denied Brown's motion for new trial on the issue of damages.
    Because this appeal involves the straightforward application of settled
    principles of law, an extended discussion is not warranted.      We are unable
    to review the nominal damage award because Brown failed to provide a
    complete transcript on appeal.    Brattrud v. Town of Exline, 
    628 F.2d 1098
    ,
    1099 (8th Cir. 1980) (per curiam).    Contrary to Brown's view, a finding of
    Eighth Amendment liability does not require an award of actual or punitive
    damages.      See Smith v. Wade, 
    461 U.S. 30
    , 52 (1983); Cummings v. Malone,
    
    995 F.2d 817
    , 822-23 (8th Cir. 1993).      Also, the district court's
    submission of a defective nominal damage instruction (stating the jury
    "may" rather than "must" award nominal damages) does not constitute plain
    error.   See Warren v. Fanning, 
    950 F.2d 1370
    , 1374 (8th Cir. 1991), cert.
    denied, 
    506 U.S. 836
    (1992).      Finally, the district court did not commit
    error in requiring Brown to pay costs under Rule 68 of the Federal Rules
    of Civil Procedure.      See O'Brien v. City of Greers Ferry, 
    873 F.2d 1115
    ,
    1120 (8th Cir. 1989).     We thus affirm the district court.   See 8th Cir. R.
    47B.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-