Aitro v. Clapper

193 F. App'x 642
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 5, 2006
DocketNo. 05-2896
StatusPublished

This text of 193 F. App'x 642 (Aitro v. Clapper) 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
Aitro v. Clapper, 193 F. App'x 642 (8th Cir. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Joe Aitro (Aitro) appeals from the district court’s1 dismissal of his complaint with prejudice. We dismiss the appeal with prejudice for failure to comply with the rules of appellate procedure. See Fed. R.App. P. 3(a)(2), 28(a); 8th Cir. R. 28A(f); Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 834-35 n. 46, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975) (pro se litigants must comply with relevant rules of procedure); Haugen v. Sutherlin, 804 F.2d 490, 491 (8th Cir.1986) (where appellant violated Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Eighth Circuit Rules pertaining to form for briefs and record, holding that any further filings by appellant would result in sanctions and dismissing appeal as frivolous). Aitro’s request for oral argument and his motion seeking remand to state court are denied.

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

Related

Faretta v. California
422 U.S. 806 (Supreme Court, 1975)
Kristin L. Haugen v. Michael Sutherlin
804 F.2d 490 (Eighth Circuit, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
193 F. App'x 642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aitro-v-clapper-ca8-2006.