Jerry Brumbaugh v. Chief Justice John Roberts

500 F. App'x 565
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedApril 1, 2013
Docket13-1126
StatusUnpublished

This text of 500 F. App'x 565 (Jerry Brumbaugh v. Chief Justice John Roberts) 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
Jerry Brumbaugh v. Chief Justice John Roberts, 500 F. App'x 565 (8th Cir. 2013).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Robert Brumbaugh appeals after the district court 1 dismissed his pro se complaint and denied his motions for reconsideration. Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that Brumbaugh’s notice of appeal (NOA) was timely only as to the district court’s January 2013 orders denying two of his motions for reconsideration, see United States v. Watson, 623 F.3d 542, 545 (8th Cir.2010) (NOA time limits are jurisdictional); Dieser v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 440 F.3d 920, 923 (8th Cir.2006) (court can raise jurisdiction sua sponte when there is indication jurisdiction is lacking), and we further conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying those motions, see In re Guidant Corp. Implantable Defibrillators Prod. Liab. Litig., 496 F.3d 863, 866 (8th Cir.2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard of review).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Brumbaugh’s motion for appointment of counsel.

1

. The Honorable Richard E. Dorr, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
500 F. App'x 565, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jerry-brumbaugh-v-chief-justice-john-roberts-ca8-2013.