Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Kenneth Bell v. State of Missouri, 07-2089 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 07-2089 Visitors: 6
Filed: Nov. 05, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 07-2089 _ Kenneth Bell; Cleophus Mack, * * Appellants, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. State of Missouri, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. * _ Submitted: October 31, 2007 Filed: November 5, 2007 _ Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Missouri prisoners Kenneth Bell and Cleophus Mack appeal the district court’s1 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) preservice dismissal of t
More
                     United States Court of Appeals
                           FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   ___________

                                   No. 07-2089
                                   ___________

Kenneth Bell; Cleophus Mack,            *
                                        *
             Appellants,                *
                                        * Appeal from the United States
      v.                                * District Court for the
                                        * Eastern District of Missouri.
State of Missouri,                      *
                                        *      [UNPUBLISHED]
             Appellee.                  *
                                   ___________

                             Submitted: October 31, 2007
                                 Filed: November 5, 2007
                                 ___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
                            ___________

PER CURIAM.

      Missouri prisoners Kenneth Bell and Cleophus Mack appeal the district court’s1
28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) preservice dismissal of their complaint. Upon de novo review,
Cooper v. Schriro, 
189 F.3d 781
, 783 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (standard of
review), we conclude dismissal was proper because the five-year limitations period
had expired. See Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120(4); Wallace v. Kato, 
127 S. Ct. 1091
, 1094
(2007) (holding § 1983 actions are characterized as personal-injury actions for
purposes of determining which state statute of limitations to apply). However, we

      1
        The Honorable E. Richard Webber, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
modify the judgment to be with prejudice, see Botten v. Shorma, 
440 F.3d 979
, 980-
81 (8th Cir. 2006) (affirming dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint with prejudice on
statute of limitations grounds), and we affirm the judgment as modified. See 8th Cir.
R. 47B.
                         ______________________________




                                         -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer