Summary
affirming an award of summary judgment in Section 1983 action and explaining, in part, that the plaintiff "had no constitutional right to counsel in this civil case, his remedy for any inadequate assistance of counsel is a legal malpractice suit, not reversal of the judgment"
Summary of this case from United States v. MillsOpinion
No. 19-1125
10-04-2019
Timothy Scott Freeman Plaintiff - Appellant v. Corizon Health, Inc.; William Ingram, Doctor Defendants - Appellees Corizon Medical Staff; Polk County Jail Staff; Sara Doe Defendants
Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines [Unpublished] Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.
Federal inmate Timothy Freeman appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties' arguments on appeal, we find the district court judge did not err in failing to recuse himself sua sponte, see Fletcher v. Conoco Pipe Line Co., 323 F.3d 661, 663, 665 (8th Cir. 2003) (applying plain-error standard where recusal claim was not raised below, and noting an adverse ruling without clear showing of bias insufficient basis for disqualification); and, as Freeman had no constitutional right to counsel in this civil case, his remedy for any inadequate assistance of counsel is a legal malpractice suit, not reversal of the judgment, see Glick v. Henderson, 855 F.2d 536, 541 (8th Cir. 1988) (holding no claim of ineffective assistance of appointed counsel in § 1983 action exists because there is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in civil case; remedy was malpractice suit against attorney rather than a new trial). Finally, we conclude Freeman waived any arguments as to the viability of his claims. See Doe v. Fort Zumwalt R-II Sch. Dist., 920 F.3d 1184, 1191 (8th Cir. 2019) (holding claim waiver where appellant did not challenge district court's rationale or entry of summary judgment).
The Honorable John A. Jarvey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.
The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.