Shavonda Smith v. Paxton Media Group, LLC

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMarch 24, 2023
Docket22-2342
StatusUnpublished

This text of Shavonda Smith v. Paxton Media Group, LLC (Shavonda Smith v. Paxton Media Group, LLC) 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
Shavonda Smith v. Paxton Media Group, LLC, (8th Cir. 2023).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 22-2342 ___________________________

Shavonda Smith

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Paxton Media Group, LLC; David M. Paxton, President and CEO, Individually and in his official capacity

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________

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

Submitted: March 21, 2023 Filed: March 24, 2023 [Unpublished] ____________

Before COLLOTON, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM. Shavonda Smith appeals following the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her counseled civil action. After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we affirm.

We conclude that the district court properly dismissed Smith’s claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), as she failed to state a civil RICO claim. See Waters v. Madson, 921 F.3d 725, 734 (8th Cir. 2019) (dismissal for failure to state claim is reviewed de novo). As to the district court’s denial of Smith’s motion for a stay pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d), we find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s ruling, or in the court’s denial of Smith’s subsequent motion for reconsideration. See Toben v. Bridgestone Retail Operations, LLC, 751 F.3d 888, 894 (8th Cir. 2014) (district court’s denial of Rule 56(d) motion is reviewed for abuse of discretion); Peterson v. Travelers Indem. Co., 867 F.3d 992, 997 (8th Cir. 2017) (reviewing ruling on motion for reconsideration for abuse of discretion). Finally, we conclude that summary judgment was proper as to Smith’s remaining claims. See Said v. Mayo Clinic, 44 F.4th 1142, 1147 (8th Cir. 2022) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

-2-

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

Related

Patricia Toben v. Bridgestone Retail Operations
751 F.3d 888 (Eighth Circuit, 2014)
Lori Peterson v. The Travelers Indemnity Co.
867 F.3d 992 (Eighth Circuit, 2017)
Charles Waters v. B. Madson
921 F.3d 725 (Eighth Circuit, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Shavonda Smith v. Paxton Media Group, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shavonda-smith-v-paxton-media-group-llc-ca8-2023.