Armstrong v. DeBois

Eighth Circuit

Armstrong v. DeBois

1 F. App'x 558

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 5, 2001

DocketNo. 00-2582

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1 F. App'x 558 (Armstrong v. DeBois) 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

Armstrong v. DeBois, 1 F. App'x 558 (8th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Charles Armstrong appeals the district court’s¹ order dismissing his pro se civil rights complaint against private-party defendant Barbara Debois. After careful review of the record, we conclude that Mr. Armstrong’s complaint was frivolous and failed to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii); Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic, 506 U.S. 263, 267-68, 113 S.Ct. 753, 122 L.Ed.2d 34 (1993); West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

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

PER CURIAM.

Charles Armstrong appeals the district court’s¹ order dismissing his pro se civil rights complaint against private-party defendant Barbara Debois. After careful review of the record, we conclude that Mr. Armstrong’s complaint was frivolous and failed to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii); Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic, 506 U.S. 263, 267-68, 113 S.Ct. 753, 122 L.Ed.2d 34 (1993); West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 F. App'x 558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/armstrong-v-debois-ca8-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack