Oscar Stilley v. United States

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: July 11, 2019
• Docket: 18-2188
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 18-2188 ___________________________

Oscar Stilley

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

United States of America; Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons; Charles E. Samuels, Jr., Director, DOJ-FBOP

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees

J.A. Keller, Director, South Central Region DOJ-FBOP; C.V. Rivera, Warden, Forrest City, Arkansas FBOP; Becky Clay, Warden, Oakdale, Louisiana FBOP; Chester Torry, Trust Fund Supervisor, Forrest City Low; C. Glasow, Alternate Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Forrest City Low; B. Hunt, Manager, Marianna Housing Unit in Forrest City; Mosby, Lieutenant, SHU Forrest City

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena ____________

Submitted: July 5, 2019 Filed: July 11, 2019 ____________

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM.

In this action brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Freedom of Information Act, and the Administrative Procedures Act, Oscar Stilley appeals after the district court1 denied some of his discovery requests, dismissed some of his claims, and adversely granted summary judgment on his remaining claims. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its discovery rulings, see Toben v. Bridgestone Retail Operations, LLC, 751 F.3d 888, 895 (8th Cir. 2014) (noting that district courts have wide discretion in handling discovery matters), and did not err in disposing of Stilley’s claims, see Kelly v. City of Omaha, 813 F.3d 1070, 1075 (8th Cir. 2016) (explaining that a district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) is reviewed de novo); see also Odom v. Kaizer, 864 F.3d 920, 921 (8th Cir. 2017) (explaining that a district court’s grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo, and that summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the prevailing party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the recommended dispositions of the Honorable Beth M. Deere, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

-2-