Frederick Smith v. Democratic Party Arkansas

668 F. App'x 192
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided August 17, 2016·No. 15-3535·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Frederick Smith appeals the adverse judgment entered by the district court 1 in his action asserting claims under, inter alia, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law. Upon careful de novo review, we conclude that the district court appropriately disposed of Smith’s claims. See Anderson-Tully Co. v. *193 McDaniel, 571 F.3d 760, 762 (8th Cir. 2009) (grant of motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4) (addressing supplemental jurisdiction); Mire les v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991) (per curiam) (discussing absolute judicial immunity); King v. Beavers, 148 F.3d 1031, 1035 n.4 (8th Cir. 1998) (discussing, inter alia, qualified immunity).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Smith’s pending motions.

1

. The Honorable D, P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

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

Frederick Smith v. Democratic Party Arkansas, 668 F. App'x 192 (8th Cir. 2016).

668 F. App'x 192 (Frederick Smith v. Democratic Party Arkansas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mireles v. Waco
502 U.S. 9 (Supreme Court, 1991)
Wayne King v. Charles Beavers
148 F.3d 1031 (Eighth Circuit, 1998)
Anderson-Tully Co. v. McDaniel
571 F.3d 760 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)