Andrew Elliott v. Kenneth S. Apfel

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedDecember 2, 1999
Docket99-2708
StatusUnpublished

This text of Andrew Elliott v. Kenneth S. Apfel (Andrew Elliott v. Kenneth S. Apfel) 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
Andrew Elliott v. Kenneth S. Apfel, (8th Cir. 1999).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 99-2708 ___________

Andrew Elliott, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Kenneth S. Apfel, Social Security * [UNPUBLISHED] Administration, * * Appellee. * ___________

Submitted: November 24, 1999

Filed: December 2, 1999 ___________

Before BOWMAN, FAGG, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

Andrew Elliott sought judicial review when his social security claim was denied. The district court ordered him twice over a three-year period to file a motion for summary judgment, but he did not do so. The district court then dismissed his complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Elliott appeals. Having reviewed the record and the briefs, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint. See Garland v. Peebles, 1 F.3d 683, 686 (8th Cir. 1993) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-

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

Related

Michal K. Garland v. Samuel W. Peebles, M.D.
1 F.3d 683 (Eighth Circuit, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Andrew Elliott v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andrew-elliott-v-kenneth-s-apfel-ca8-1999.