Vernon Ball v. Zales Corp.
This text of Vernon Ball v. Zales Corp. (Vernon Ball v. Zales Corp.) 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.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________
No. 97-2978 ___________
Vernon Ball, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Zales Corp.; Bailey, Banks & Biddle, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellees. * ___________
Submitted: March 19, 1998 Filed: April 2, 1998 ___________
Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ___________
PER CURIAM.
Vernon Ball appeals from the district court&s1 order dismissing his employment discrimination action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 37(b) and 41(b). After careful review of the record and the parties& briefs, we deny Ball&s motion for appointment of counsel, and we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action for the reasons it stated. See First Gen. Resources Co. v. Elton Leather Corp., 958 F.2d 204, 206 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (Rule 41(b) standard of review); Avionic Co. v. General Dynamics Corp., 957 F.2d
1 The HONORABLE E. RICHARD WEBBER, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. 555, 558 (8th Cir. 1992) (Rule 37(b) standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Vernon Ball v. Zales Corp., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vernon-ball-v-zales-corp-ca8-1998.