Filed: Jan. 14, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-3331 _ Hillmar I. Bittner, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Appeal from the United States Michael Hatch, sued as Mike Hatch, * District Court for the MN Attorney General; Peter M. * District of Minnesota. Ackerberg, Asst. Attorney General; * Robert J. Goggins, 1st Dist. Judge; * Luann Burandt, Carver County * [UNPUBLISHED] Social Services, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: January 5, 2000 Filed: January 14, 2000 _ Before BOWMAN, FAGG, and MURPH
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-3331 _ Hillmar I. Bittner, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Appeal from the United States Michael Hatch, sued as Mike Hatch, * District Court for the MN Attorney General; Peter M. * District of Minnesota. Ackerberg, Asst. Attorney General; * Robert J. Goggins, 1st Dist. Judge; * Luann Burandt, Carver County * [UNPUBLISHED] Social Services, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: January 5, 2000 Filed: January 14, 2000 _ Before BOWMAN, FAGG, and MURPHY..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 99-3331
___________
Hillmar I. Bittner, *
*
Appellant, *
*
v. *
* Appeal from the United States
Michael Hatch, sued as Mike Hatch, * District Court for the
MN Attorney General; Peter M. * District of Minnesota.
Ackerberg, Asst. Attorney General; *
Robert J. Goggins, 1st Dist. Judge; *
Luann Burandt, Carver County * [UNPUBLISHED]
Social Services, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: January 5, 2000
Filed: January 14, 2000
___________
Before BOWMAN, FAGG, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Hillmar I. Bittner appeals from the district court’s1 dismissal of his complaint on
the basis of absolute judicial immunity and for failure to state a claim upon which relief
1
The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the
District of Minnesota.
can be granted. After de novo review, see Ring v. First Interstate Mortgage, Inc.,
984
F.2d 924, 926 (8th Cir. 1993), we conclude dismissal was proper for the reasons stated
by the district court. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
-2-