George Poole v. Gene Stubblefield

216 F. App'x 607
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 16, 2007
Docket06-2240
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 216 F. App'x 607 (George Poole v. Gene Stubblefield) 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
George Poole v. Gene Stubblefield, 216 F. App'x 607 (8th Cir. 2007).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

George Poole appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal without prejudice, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(b) and 37(d), of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit. Upon careful review of the record, we find no abuse of discretion in the court’s dismissal of Poole’s lawsuit for failure to comply with the court’s order directing him to respond to defendants’ discovery requests, and for his unexplained failure to attend his properly noticed deposition. See Good Stewardship Christian Ctr. v. Empire Bank, 341 F.3d 794, 797 (8th Cir.2003) (standard of review for Rule 41(b) dismissal); Aziz v. Wright, 34 F.3d 587, 589 (8th Cir.1994) (standard of review for Rule 37(d) dismissal); Schooley v. Kennedy, 712 F.2d 372, 374 (8th Cir.1983) (per curiam) (lesser sanction of dismissal without prejudice mitigates against finding abuse of discretion). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Thomas C. Mummert, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

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

Related

Roberts v. Payne
E.D. Arkansas, 2022

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
216 F. App'x 607, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-poole-v-gene-stubblefield-ca8-2007.