Koch v. Kozeal

Eighth Circuit

Koch v. Kozeal

698 F. App'x 311

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedOctober 4, 2017

DocketNo. 16-4197

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 698 F. App'x 311 (Koch v. Kozeal) 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

Koch v. Kozeal, 698 F. App'x 311 (8th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Mark Koch appeals from the order of the District Court¹ granting defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

After de novo review, we conclude that the District Court properly dismissed the complaint. See Skit Int’l, Ltd. v. DAC Techs. of Ark., Inc., 487 F.3d 1154, 1156 (8th Cir.) (standard of review), cert. denied, 552 U.S. 991, 128 S.Ct. 495, 169 L.Ed.2d 340 (2007). Koch’s filings clearly indicate that he brought the instant suit seeking to overturn a previously entered state-court judgment, and the District Court correctly concluded that it had no jurisdiction. See Dodson v. Univ. of Ark. for Med. Scis., 601 F.3d 750, 754 (8th Cir. 2010) (per curiam) (noting that federal courts generally have no subject matter jurisdiction to consider appeals from state-court judgments), cert. denied, 562 U.S. 1135, 131 S.Ct. 902, 178 L.Ed.2d 747 (2011). We affirm the judgment and deny Koch’s motions to supplement the record.

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

PER CURIAM.

Mark Koch appeals from the order of the District Court¹ granting defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

After de novo review, we conclude that the District Court properly dismissed the complaint. See Skit Int’l, Ltd. v. DAC Techs. of Ark., Inc., 487 F.3d 1154, 1156 (8th Cir.) (standard of review), cert. denied, 552 U.S. 991, 128 S.Ct. 495, 169 L.Ed.2d 340 (2007). Koch’s filings clearly indicate that he brought the instant suit seeking to overturn a previously entered state-court judgment, and the District Court correctly concluded that it had no jurisdiction. See Dodson v. Univ. of Ark. for Med. Scis., 601 F.3d 750, 754 (8th Cir. 2010) (per curiam) (noting that federal courts generally have no subject matter jurisdiction to consider appeals from state-court judgments), cert. denied, 562 U.S. 1135, 131 S.Ct. 902, 178 L.Ed.2d 747 (2011). We affirm the judgment and deny Koch’s motions to supplement the record.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

698 F. App'x 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koch-v-kozeal-ca8-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack