Filed: Sep. 04, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-1260 _ David L. Parrish, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the State of Nebraska; Nebraska Workers’ * District of Nebraska. Compensation Court; United States * Fidelity & Guarantee, doing business as * [UNPUBLISHED] USF&G; Holiday Inn, doing business * as Omaha Hotel, Inc., doing business as * Brandywines, doing business as * Brandywines Nightclub and Casino, * doing business as Omaha Restaura
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-1260 _ David L. Parrish, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the State of Nebraska; Nebraska Workers’ * District of Nebraska. Compensation Court; United States * Fidelity & Guarantee, doing business as * [UNPUBLISHED] USF&G; Holiday Inn, doing business * as Omaha Hotel, Inc., doing business as * Brandywines, doing business as * Brandywines Nightclub and Casino, * doing business as Omaha Restauran..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 01-1260
___________
David L. Parrish, *
*
Appellant, *
*
v. * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the
State of Nebraska; Nebraska Workers’ * District of Nebraska.
Compensation Court; United States *
Fidelity & Guarantee, doing business as * [UNPUBLISHED]
USF&G; Holiday Inn, doing business *
as Omaha Hotel, Inc., doing business as *
Brandywines, doing business as *
Brandywines Nightclub and Casino, *
doing business as Omaha Restaurant, *
Inc.; Melvin C. Hansen, doing business *
as Hansen, Engles & Locher; Joseph *
Grant, doing business as Gaines, *
Mullen, Pansing & Hogan, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: August 30, 2001
Filed: September 4, 2001
___________
Before HANSEN, FAGG, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
David Parrish appeals the district court’s1 orders dismissing his action based on
immunity and lack of jurisdiction, and denying appointment of counsel. Upon de novo
review, see Rose v. U.S. Dep’t of Educ.,
187 F.3d 926, 928 (8th Cir. 1999); Clarinda
Home Health v. Shalala,
100 F.3d 526, 528 (8th Cir. 1996), we conclude the district
court did not err in denying appointment of counsel, and we affirm the dismissal for the
reasons stated in the district court’s order. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
1
The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the District of Nebraska.
-2-
2