
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 96-1537                                   KEVIN M. CASTRO,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.             UNITED STATES DEPT. OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT, ET AL.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND                 [Hon. Francis J. Boyle, Senior U.S. District Judge]                                         __________________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                          Boudin and Lynch, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Kevin M. Castro on brief pro se.            _______________            Jean A.  Boulanger and Capaldi &  Boulanger on  brief for appellee            __________________     ____________________        Coventry Housing Authority.            Marc DeSisto, Kathleen M. Powers and  DeSisto Law Offices on brief            ____________  __________________      ___________________        for appellee Barry Yeaw, in  his capacity as Treasurer of the  Town of        Coventry.                                 ____________________                                   November 7, 1996                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.   Having reviewed the parties'  briefs,                      __________            we summarily  affirm the  judgment below on  the ground  that            appellant has  made no developed  argument for reversal.   We            add  that  the   individual  police  officers   who  arrested            appellant were never made parties to the instant lawsuit, and            that the Town  of Coventry may  not be  held liable under  42            U.S.C.   1983 on a theory of respondeat superior.  See Monell                                         __________ ________   ___ ______            v. New  York City  Dep't of  Soc. Servs.,  436 U.S. 658,  691               _____________________________________            (1978).   In addition, based on his filings below, it appears            as  if  the  only  damages  appellant  sought  were  punitive            damages.   Such damages are  not available under  42 U.S.C.              1983  against  either  the   Town  or  the  Coventry  Housing            Authority.  See City  of Newport v. Fact Concerts,  Inc., 453                        ___ ________________    ____________________            U.S. 247, 271 (1981); Adler  v Lincoln Housing Authority, 623                                  _____    _________________________            A.2d 20, 21 n.1 (R.I. 1993).                      Affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.                      _________  ___                                         -2-
