From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ellingburg v. Lucas

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jun 25, 1975
518 F.2d 1196 (8th Cir. 1975)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

holding that damages for defamation, allegedly incurred when defendant called plaintiff by an obscene name, are not recoverable under § 1983

Summary of this case from Oltarzewski v. Ruggiero
See 14 Summaries

Opinion

No. 75-1012.

Submitted June 9, 1975.

Decided June 25, 1975.

James G. Ellingburg, pro se.

Jim Guy Tucker, Atty. Gen., and Robert A. Newcomb, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, Ark., for respondent-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Before VAN OOSTERHOUT, Senior Circuit Judge, and LAY and HEANEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, an Arkansas state prisoner, appeals from the dismissal of an action for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 brought against a prison employee. In his complaint, plaintiff alleged the defendant defamed his reputation by calling him an obscene name. We affirm.

Damages for defamation are not recoverable under § 1983 because a defamed person has not been deprived of any right, privilege or immunity secured to him by the Federal Constitution or laws of the United States. See Morey v. Independent School Dist., 429 F.2d 428 (8th Cir. 1970), affirming, 312 F. Supp. 1257, 1262 (D.Minn. 1969); Azar v. Conley, 456 F.2d 1382, 1388-1389 (6th Cir. 1972); Heller v. Roberts, 386 F.2d 832 (2d Cir. 1967).

Judgment is affirmed.

Summaries of

Ellingburg v. Lucas

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jun 25, 1975
518 F.2d 1196 (8th Cir. 1975)

holding that damages for defamation, allegedly incurred when defendant called plaintiff by an obscene name, are not recoverable under § 1983

Summary of this case from Oltarzewski v. Ruggiero

holding that a prisoner's allegations that a prison employee had called him an obscene name failed to state a plausible § 1983 claim

Summary of this case from Stamps v. Weber

holding damages for defamation, resulting when defendant called plaintiff an obscene name, are not recoverable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

Summary of this case from Kalmio v. Mettler

holding that damages for defamation, allegedly incurred when defendant called plaintiff by an obscene name, are not recoverable under § 1983

Summary of this case from Yocum v. Kootenai County

holding damages for defamation, resulting when defendant called plaintiff an obscene name, are not recoverable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

Summary of this case from Buckley v. Gomez

concluding that slander and defamation claims are not cognizable under section 1983

Summary of this case from Chambers v. Staff-Mid America

affirming dismissal of § 1983 complaint alleging prison employee called plaintiff inmate an obscene name

Summary of this case from Guzinski v. Hasselbach

stating that an inmate cannot recover damages for defamation under § 1983 "because a defamed person has not been deprived of any right, privilege or immunity secured to him by the Federal Constitution or laws of the United States"

Summary of this case from Curry v. Women's E. Reception Diagnostic & Corr. Ctr.

stating that an inmate cannot recover damages for defamation under § 1983 "because a defamed person has not been deprived of any right, privilege or immunity secured to him by the Federal Constitution or laws of the United States"

Summary of this case from O'Brien v. Murphy

stating that an inmate cannot recover damages for defamation under § 1983 "because a defamed person has not been deprived of any right, privilege or immunity secured to him by the Federal Constitution or laws of the United States"

Summary of this case from Cook v. Godert

stating that an inmate cannot recover damages for defamation under § 1983 "because a defamed person has not been deprived of any right, privilege or immunity secured to him by the Federal Constitution or laws of the United States"

Summary of this case from Robison v. Hovis

stating that an inmate cannot recover damages for defamation under § 1983 "because a defamed person has not been deprived of any right, privilege or immunity secured to him by the Federal Constitution or laws of the United States"

Summary of this case from Robison v. Salemen

stating that an inmate cannot recover damages for defamation under § 1983 "because a defamed person has not been deprived of any right, privilege or immunity secured to him by the Federal Constitution or laws of the United States"

Summary of this case from Robison v. Sanderson

calling plaintiff by an obscene name

Summary of this case from Parsons v. Bd. Cty. Com'rs Marshall Cty., Kan.
Case details for

Ellingburg v. Lucas

Case Details

Full title:JAMES G. ELLINGBURG, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. A. G. LUCAS, CORRECTIONAL…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Jun 25, 1975

Citations

518 F.2d 1196 (8th Cir. 1975)

Citing Cases

Robison v. Sanderson

Martin v. Sargent, 780 F.2d 1334, 1339 (8th Cir. 1985). See also Ellingburg v. Lucas, 518 F.2d 1196, 1197…

Cook v. Godert

Typically, mere words are not enough to support a claim of a constitutional violation. See Martin v. Sargent,…

143 Citing Cases