Curtis Stewart appeals the district court’s1 denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction. After carefully reviewing the district court’s decision, see United Indus. Corp. v. Clorox Co., 140 F.3d 1175, 1178-79 (8th Cir.1998) (setting forth factors to be considered by district court in deciding whether to issue preliminary injunction; stating standard to be applied by appellate court in reviewing district court’s denial of motion for preliminary injunction), we conclude the district court properly denied Stewart’s motion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
285 F. App'x 312
Curtis STEWART, Appellant, v. CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, (CMS); Dave Dormire; Arthur Woods; J. Sulltop; Melody Griffin; Alfred Garcia; John A. Matthews; Leon Vickers; Raymond Bloomquist; Jeff Bolton; Pamela Swartz; David Cochran, Appellees.
No. 07-2252.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: July 18, 2008.
Filed: Aug. 8, 2008.
Curtis Stewart, Jefferson City, MO, pro se.
Mark A. Lynch, Blane R. Markley, Holbrook & Osborn, P.A., Overland Park, KS, for appellees Correctional Medical Services, Bolton, Sultrop, Matthews, Vickers, and Schwartz.
John L. Roark, Phebe La Mar, Smith Lewis, LLP, Columbia, MO, for appellee Bloomquist.
Erica K. Bredehoft, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO (Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., on the brief), for appellees Dormiré, Wood, and Griffin.
Before MURPHY, BYE, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
Stewart v. Correctional Medical Services
285 F. App'x 312
Case Details
285 F. App'x 312
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!