Levi Garrett v. Ronald Stock
This text of Levi Garrett v. Ronald Stock (Levi Garrett v. Ronald Stock) 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
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________
No. 25-2878 ___________________________
Levi Edward Garrett
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
James Edward Garrett; Sandra Ann Garrett
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs
v.
Ronald Stock; Kristin K. Stock
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ___________________________
No. 25-2973 ___________________________
James Edward Garrett
Sandra Ann Garrett; Levi Edward Garrett
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________ Appeals from United States District Court for the District of South Dakota - Central ____________
Submitted: April 30, 2026 Filed: May 5, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________
Before LOKEN, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________
PER CURIAM.
James and Levi Garrett appeal following the district court’s1 rulings denying a motion for a continuance and entering judgment in accordance with a jury verdict on the issue of damages stemming from breached real estate agreements. Following our review, we conclude that denial of the request for a continuance, which was signed only by Levi Garrett after the Garretts’ attorneys withdrew, was not an abuse of discretion, see Peter Kiewit Sons’, Inc. v. Wall Street Equity Group, Inc., 809 F.3d 1018, 1022 (8th Cir. 2016) (reviewing denial of postponement for abuse of discretion; finding no abuse of discretion in denial of deferment of damages hearing where no time frame was provided as to when, if ever, reason for delay would be resolved); and we decline to consider challenges to the jury trial or entry of judgment following the damages verdict that were not raised in the district court, see id. (reviewing court ordinarily does not consider argument first raised on appeal); see also Jones ex rel. Jones v. Corr. Med. Servs., Inc., 401 F.3d 950, 952 (8th Cir. 2005) (non-attorney may not engage in practice of law on behalf of others). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. ______________________________
1 The Honorable Roberto A. Lange, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of South Dakota.
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Levi Garrett v. Ronald Stock, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levi-garrett-v-ronald-stock-ca8-2026.