Abe Givins, Jr. v. James Brisco

Eighth Circuit

Abe Givins, Jr. v. James Brisco

515 F. App'x 624

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJune 27, 2013

Docket12-3847

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 515 F. App'x 624 (Abe Givins, Jr. v. James Brisco) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Abe Givins, Jr. v. James Brisco, 515 F. App'x 624 (8th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Abe Givins appeals the district court’s 1 preservice dismissal of his complaint, without prejudice, for lack of subject matter *625 jurisdiction. Upon careful de novo review, see LeMay v. U.S. Postal Serv., 450 F.3d 797, 799 (8th Cir.2006) (de novo review of dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction), we find no basis for reversal, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(h)(3) (if court determines at any time that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction, court must dismiss action); Biscanin v. Merrill Lynch & Co., 407 F.3d 905, 907 (8th Cir.2005) (“[i]f the asserted basis of federal jurisdiction is patently meritless, then dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is appropriate”). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny all of Givins’s pending motions.

1

. The Honorable Charles A. Shaw, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Abe Givins appeals the district court’s 1 preservice dismissal of his complaint, without prejudice, for lack of subject matter *625 jurisdiction. Upon careful de novo review, see LeMay v. U.S. Postal Serv., 450 F.3d 797, 799 (8th Cir.2006) (de novo review of dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction), we find no basis for reversal, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(h)(3) (if court determines at any time that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction, court must dismiss action); Biscanin v. Merrill Lynch & Co., 407 F.3d 905, 907 (8th Cir.2005) (“[i]f the asserted basis of federal jurisdiction is patently meritless, then dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is appropriate”). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny all of Givins’s pending motions.

1

. The Honorable Charles A. Shaw, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

515 F. App'x 624, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abe-givins-jr-v-james-brisco-ca8-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack