Robert Orlick v. Grand Forks Housing Authority

Eighth Circuit

Robert Orlick v. Grand Forks Housing Authority

616 F. App'x 218

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedOctober 8, 2015

Docket15-1785

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 616 F. App'x 218 (Robert Orlick v. Grand Forks Housing Authority) 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

Robert Orlick v. Grand Forks Housing Authority, 616 F. App'x 218 (8th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Robert Orlick appeals after the district court 1 dismissed one of his pro se civil actions as barred by res judicata, and dismissed another of his pro se civil actions for failure to state a claim. He has filed an “emergency motion” on appeal. After careful de novo review, see Laase v. Cty. of Isanti, 638 F.3d 853, 856 (8th Cir.2011); Levy v. Ohl, 477 F.3d 988, 991 (8th Cir.2007), we conclude that Orlick’s complaints were properly dismissed for the reasons explained by the district court. Accord *219 ingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. The pending motion is denied.

1

. The Honorable Alice R. Senechal, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of North Dakota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

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

PER CURIAM.

Robert Orlick appeals after the district court 1 dismissed one of his pro se civil actions as barred by res judicata, and dismissed another of his pro se civil actions for failure to state a claim. He has filed an “emergency motion” on appeal. After careful de novo review, see Laase v. Cty. of Isanti, 638 F.3d 853, 856 (8th Cir.2011); Levy v. Ohl, 477 F.3d 988, 991 (8th Cir.2007), we conclude that Orlick’s complaints were properly dismissed for the reasons explained by the district court. Accord *219 ingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. The pending motion is denied.

1

. The Honorable Alice R. Senechal, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of North Dakota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

616 F. App'x 218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-orlick-v-grand-forks-housing-authority-ca8-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack