Paul Katekaru v. Cameron Egan

670 F. App'x 426
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided November 3, 2016·No. 15-3662·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Paul Katekaru appeals after the district court 1 adversely granted summary judgment on two of his claims, dismissed a third claim without prejudice for lack of standing, and denied his post-judgment motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). After carefully reviewing the record, and parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no basis to reverse. See Brooks v. Roy, 776 F.3d 957, 959-60 (8th Cir. 2015) (grant of summary judgment reviewed de novo); Hodak v. City of St. Peters, 535 F.3d 899, 903 (8th Cir. 2008) (determination as to plaintiffs standing reviewed de novo); United States v. Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist., 440 F.3d 930, 933-34 (8th Cir. 2006) (denial of Rule 59(e) motion reviewed for abuse of discretion). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Greg Kays, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.

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

Paul Katekaru v. Cameron Egan, 670 F. App'x 426 (8th Cir. 2016).

670 F. App'x 426 (Paul Katekaru v. Cameron Egan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hodak v. City of St. Peters
535 F.3d 899 (Eighth Circuit, 2008)
Wesley Brooks v. Tom Roy
776 F.3d 957 (Eighth Circuit, 2015)