Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JAN 22 2001
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
No. 00-1131
(D.C. No. 99-S-861)
(D. Colo)
Defendants-Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
this appeal.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
the court accepted the magistrate judges recommendation and entered judgment
for defendants. This appeal followed. We have jurisdiction pursuant to
28 U.S.C. 1291. We review the
novo, applying the same standards as that court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).
See Simms v. Okla. ex rel. Dept of Mental Health & Substance Abuse Servs.
165 F.3d 1321, 1326 (10th Cir.),
was entitled to qualified immunity. After careful review of the entire record on
appeal together with the parties briefs in light of the applicable law, we conclude
that the district court correctly decided this case. Therefore, for substantially the
reasons stated in the district court s Memorandum Opinion and Order dated
February 18, 2000, the judgment of the United States District Court for the
District of Colorado is AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
Bobby R. Baldock
Circuit Judge
-3-