Rick Searcy v. Central Intelligence Agency

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 4, 2023
Docket22-1873
StatusUnpublished

This text of Rick Searcy v. Central Intelligence Agency (Rick Searcy v. Central Intelligence Agency) 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
Rick Searcy v. Central Intelligence Agency, (8th Cir. 2023).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 22-1873 ___________________________

Rick Lee Searcy

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Central Intelligence Agency; National Security Agency; George A. Pickett, Nina Pickett "The Estate of George Pickett"; Stephen K. Griffin, Former Clinton County Judge, 43rd Judicial Circuit; Werner A. Moentmann, Former Ray County Judge, Judicial Circuit 8; Peter Schloss, Excelsior Springs Municipal Court Prosecuting Attorney; Shawn Blair, Excelsior Springs Municipal Court Judge; Wayne Mitchell Elliott, Dorothy Sanborn Elliott, "The Estate of W. Mitchell Elliot", Former Clinton County Prosecuting Attorney; Christopher Herschel Pickett; James Michael Kennedy; Christy Lea Fisher; John Sales; Bob Griffin, Former Missouri Speaker of the House; The United States Army; Church of Latter Day Saints

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri ____________

Submitted: December 27, 2022 Filed: January 4, 2023 [Unpublished] ____________

Before GRASZ, MELLOY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM.

Rick Lee Searcy appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his pro se 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986 action. After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no basis for reversal. See Plymouth Cnty. v. Merscorp, Inc., 774 F.3d 1155, 1158 (8th Cir. 2014) (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) dismissal reviewed de novo); Moore v. Jackson, 123 F.3d 1082, 1085 (8th Cir. 1997) (Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) dismissal reviewed for abuse of discretion); Oden v. Shane Smith Enters., Inc., 27 F.4th 631, 633 (8th Cir. 2022) (recusal decision reviewed for abuse of discretion). Accordingly, we affirm and deny the motion for oral argument as moot. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

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

-2-

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

Related

Moore v. Jackson
123 F.3d 1082 (Eighth Circuit, 1997)
Plymouth County, Iowa v. Merscorp, Inc.
774 F.3d 1155 (Eighth Circuit, 2014)
Kimberly Oden v. Shane Smith Enterprises, Inc.
27 F.4th 631 (Eighth Circuit, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Rick Searcy v. Central Intelligence Agency, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rick-searcy-v-central-intelligence-agency-ca8-2023.