Apollyon Kennedy-Bey v. Metropolitan Council

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedApril 3, 2018
Docket17-1835
StatusUnpublished

This text of Apollyon Kennedy-Bey v. Metropolitan Council (Apollyon Kennedy-Bey v. Metropolitan Council) 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
Apollyon Kennedy-Bey v. Metropolitan Council, (8th Cir. 2018).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 17-1835 ___________________________

Apollyon Kennedy-Bey

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Metropolitan Council; Emmanuel Martinez Cruz; John Steele; Matthew Brake; Timothy Asp, each in his official capacity as a Metro Transit Police Officer

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis ____________

Submitted: March 1, 2018 Filed: April 3, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________

Before GRUENDER, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM. In this pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Apollyon Kennedy-Bey appeals after the district court1 adversely granted summary judgment.

Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in striking Kennedy-Bey’s untimely amended complaint, see Kmak v. Am. Century Cos., 873 F.3d 1030, 1034 (8th Cir. 2017) (standard of review), and properly granted summary judgment, see Beaulieu v. Ludeman, 690 F.3d 1017, 1024 (8th Cir. 2012) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo, viewing record in light most favorable to nonmovant); see also City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 109, 111 (1983) (plaintiff was not entitled to injunction where there was no showing of any real or immediate threat that plaintiff would be wronged again); Monroe v. Ark. State Univ., 495 F.3d 591, 594 (8th Cir. 2007) (Eleventh Amendment bars suits for any kind of relief against states and state agencies); Murphy v. State of Ark., 127 F.3d 750, 754 (8th Cir. 1997) (§ 1983 claims for damages against defendants in their official capacities were barred). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Donovan W. Frank, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Leo I. Brisbois, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

-2-

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

Related

City of Los Angeles v. Lyons
461 U.S. 95 (Supreme Court, 1983)
Wallace Beaulieu v. Cal Ludeman
690 F.3d 1017 (Eighth Circuit, 2012)
Monroe v. Arkansas State University
495 F.3d 591 (Eighth Circuit, 2007)
Thomas Kmak v. American Century Companies
873 F.3d 1030 (Eighth Circuit, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Apollyon Kennedy-Bey v. Metropolitan Council, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/apollyon-kennedy-bey-v-metropolitan-council-ca8-2018.