[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
MAR 3, 2009
No. 08-14038 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 07-20166-CV-PAS
JEFFREY JOSEPH CASEY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CITY OF HIALEAH, FL,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(March 3, 2009)
Before BARKETT, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Jeffery Joseph Casey appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment
on behalf of the City of Hilaleah, Florida on his claim, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983, alleging that the City of Hialeah had a policy which authorized the use of
excessive force during the execution of a search warrant. “We review the district
court’s grant of summary judgment de novo” and “review the district court’s
findings of fact for clear error.” Levinson v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co., 245
F.3d 1321, 1325 (11th Cir. 2001). “We review for abuse of discretion the district
court’s admission of evidence.” United States v. Deverso, 518 F.3d 1250, 1254
(11th Cir. 2008).
Summary judgment is appropriate when “‘the pleadings . . . show that there
is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a
judgment as a matter of law.’” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247
(1986) (quoting F ED. R. C IV. P. 56 (c)). When reviewing a motion for summary
judgment, we view the record and all factual inferences in the light most favorable
to the nonmoving party. Allen v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 121 F.3d 642, 646 (11th Cir.
1997).
Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we discern no reversible
error. Here, Casey has not presented any evidence whatsoever that the City of
Hialeah had any policy in place which authorized excessive force. Accordingly,
we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
2