Reginald Robinson v. Pulaski Technical College

698 F. App'x 859
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedOctober 17, 2017
Docket17-2099
StatusUnpublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 698 F. App'x 859 (Reginald Robinson v. Pulaski Technical College) 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
Reginald Robinson v. Pulaski Technical College, 698 F. App'x 859 (8th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Reginald Robinson appeals the district court’s 1 preservice dismissal, without prejudice, of his pro se complaint. He also moves to supplement the' record on appeal.

Upon de novo review, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed Robinson’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Laclede Gas Co. v. St Charles Cnty., Mo., 713 F.3d 413, 417 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction). Robinson did not assert a valid basis for federal question jurisdiction because he relied on federal criminal statutes only, and because the complaint revealed a lack of diversity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (requirements for federal question jurisdiction); Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619, 93 S.Ct. 1146, 35 L.Ed.2d 536 (1973) (private citizen lacks judicially cognizable interest in prosecution of another); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (requirements for diversity jurisdiction); Ryan v. Schneider Nat’l Carriers, Inc., 263 F.3d 816, 819 (8th Cir. 2001) (discussing diversity of citizenship). We also conclude that the material proffered with Robinson’s motion to supplement the record would not have affected the oui> come.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and Robinson’s motion to supplement the record is denied as moot.

1

. The Honorable D.P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

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

Related

Peter Allan, Sr. v. Minnesota DHS
127 F.4th 717 (Eighth Circuit, 2025)
Carpenters' Pension Fund of IL v. Michael Neidorff
30 F.4th 777 (Eighth Circuit, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
698 F. App'x 859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reginald-robinson-v-pulaski-technical-college-ca8-2017.