Filed: Aug. 10, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 98-3931 _ B. J. Griffith; Gordon Griffith; * Delta Waste Recovery, Inc., * * Appellants, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Arkansas Department of Pollution * [UNPUBLISHED] Control and Ecology; East Arkansas * Planning and Development District; * East Arkansas Regional Solid Waste * Management District, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: May 14, 1999 Filed: August 10, 1999 _ Before W
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 98-3931 _ B. J. Griffith; Gordon Griffith; * Delta Waste Recovery, Inc., * * Appellants, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Arkansas Department of Pollution * [UNPUBLISHED] Control and Ecology; East Arkansas * Planning and Development District; * East Arkansas Regional Solid Waste * Management District, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: May 14, 1999 Filed: August 10, 1999 _ Before WO..
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 98-3931 ___________ B. J. Griffith; Gordon Griffith; * Delta Waste Recovery, Inc., * * Appellants, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Arkansas Department of Pollution * [UNPUBLISHED] Control and Ecology; East Arkansas * Planning and Development District; * East Arkansas Regional Solid Waste * Management District, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: May 14, 1999 Filed: August 10, 1999 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, BEAM, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. B.J. Griffith, Gordon Griffith, and Delta Waste Recovery, Inc., appeal from the judgment of the district court1 granting the appellees’ separate motions to dismiss. 1 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Having reviewed the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the court correctly analyzed the relevant legal principles as they apply to the facts of the case. Because an extended opinion would have no precedential value, we affirm without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. The judgment is affirmed. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -2-
