Collum v. Paypal, Inc.
This text of 456 F. App'x 636 (Collum v. Paypal, Inc.) 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.
Opinion
[UNPUBLISHED]
Brian T. Collum appeals from the district courts’1 dismissals, without prejudice, of his pro se actions asserting claims of disability discrimination against his former employer and numerous individuals. Upon careful de novo review, see Park-hurst v. Tabor, 569 F.3d 861, 865 (8th Cir.2009) (standard of review), this court concludes that the dismissals were proper for the reasons stated by the district courts.
To the extent Collum did not present some of these claims in the district courts, they may not be advanced for the first time on appeal. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir.2004) (stating general rule that claims not presented in district court may not be advanced for first time on appeal).
This court affirms. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
456 F. App'x 636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collum-v-paypal-inc-ca8-2012.