The opinion
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
JUAN V. BROWN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 4:24-cv-00216-SRC
)
RONNIE HAMPTON and LUCAS )
HAMPTON, )
)
Defendants. )
Order
Rule 56(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[t]he court shall grant
summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact
and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Under Rule 56(f), the Court may,
“[a]fter giving notice and a reasonable time to respond,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f), grant summary
judgment “sua sponte, ‘provided that the party against whom judgment will be entered was given
sufficient advance notice and an adequate opportunity to demonstrate why summary judgment
should not be granted,’” Hubbard v. Parker, 994 F.2d 529, 531 (8th Cir. 1993) (emphasis
removed) (quoting Interco Inc. v. Nat’l Sur. Corp., 900 F.2d 1264, 1269 (8th Cir. 1990)).
After granting the Hamptons summary judgment on most of Brown’s claims, see docs.
119, 130, the Court identified one possible remaining claim, see doc. 130 at 8–9. Brown claims
that after filing this lawsuit, Ronnie Hampton repeatedly harassed Brown, taunting him with
“threats of physical violence on numerous occasions.” Doc. 51 at 21. Lucas Hampton then
allegedly said he would “blow [Brown’s] head off” if he saw him around town, because Brown
“snitched” on him. Id. The Court noted that “mere verbal threats made by a state-actor do not
constitute a [section] 1983 claim.” Doc. 130 at 8 (alteration in original) (quoting Hopson v.
Fredericksen, 961 F.2d 1374, 1378 (8th Cir. 1992)). “[Q]uestion[ing] the legal sufficiency of
why it should not grant the Hamptons summary judgment on Brown’s final remaining claim. Jd.
at 8-9.
Brown’s deadline came and went, and apart from filing a notice of appeal, doc. 132, and
a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, see doc. 133, Brown filed no briefing
responsive to the Court’s order. Accordingly, the Court grants the Hamptons summary judgment
on this final remaining claim and dismisses Brown’s [51] Second Amended Complaint with
prejudice. A separate judgment accompanies this Order.
So ordered this 8th day of September 2026.
°C
wee CK
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE