Barnum v. City of Tulsa
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
JEROME A. HOLMES, Circuit Judge.
James Barnum and Tritanna Murphy (“Appellants”) appeal from the district court’s order dismissing their complaint without prejudice for failure to effectuate timely service on the defendants. Construing their pro se brief liberally, as we must, see Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94, 127 S.Ct. 2197, 167 L.Ed.2d 1081 (2007) (per curiam), we affirm the judgment of the district court.
I
On August 14, 2012, Appellants filed a civil-rights complaint in the Northern District of Oklahoma. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, they sued the City of Tulsa…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Meilleur v. StrongCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
- Olsen v. MapesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- Toby J. Espinoza v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
- Bolden v. City of TopekaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Adebowale Ijiyode v. Oklahoma City Police Department, et al.District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2026
- Busby v. Communication Workers of America UnionDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2023
- Calhoun v. The Greens at Lake OverholserDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2025
- Dorrell v. Comanche County Facilities AuthorityDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2025
- Drew v. United States Postal ServiceDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2024
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.