Clayton Walker v. Cory Shafer

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedOctober 4, 2022
Docket22-1610
StatusUnpublished

This text of Clayton Walker v. Cory Shafer (Clayton Walker v. Cory Shafer) 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
Clayton Walker v. Cory Shafer, (8th Cir. 2022).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 22-1610 ___________________________

Clayton Walker

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Cory Shafer, in his individual and official capacity; City of Rapid City

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees

United States; State of South Dakota; Police Dept.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of South Dakota - Western ____________

Submitted: September 27, 2022 Filed: October 4, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________

Before SHEPHERD, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM. Clayton Walker appeals after the district court1 dismissed his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to comply with court orders. Following a careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case. See Smith v. Gold Dust Casino, 526 F.3d 402, 404 (8th Cir. 2008) (dismissal for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with court orders is reviewed for abuse of discretion); see also Comstock v. UPS Ground Freight, Inc., 775 F.3d 990, 992 (8th Cir. 2014) (dismissal as a discovery sanction is reviewed for abuse of discretion).

To the extent Walker challenges the earlier adverse grant of summary judgment as to his Ninth Amendment claim, we conclude that the district court correctly granted summary judgment. See Johnson v. Blaukat, 453 F.3d 1108, 1112 (8th Cir. 2006) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo); Strandberg v. City of Helena, 791 F.2d 744, 748 (9th Cir. 1986) (Ninth Amendment does not create rights cognizable in a § 1983 action).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Jeffrey L. Viken, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Daneta Wollmann, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of South Dakota.

-2-

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

Related

Strandberg v. City Of Helena
791 F.2d 744 (Ninth Circuit, 1986)
Johnson v. Blaukat
453 F.3d 1108 (Eighth Circuit, 2006)
Smith v. Gold Dust Casino
526 F.3d 402 (Eighth Circuit, 2008)
Dolores Comstock v. UPS Ground Freight, Inc.
775 F.3d 990 (Eighth Circuit, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Clayton Walker v. Cory Shafer, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clayton-walker-v-cory-shafer-ca8-2022.