Filed: Aug. 17, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-1193 _ Patricia Vylasek; John J. Vylasek lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Services, Inc.; Aurora Loan Services, LLC; Nationstar Mortgage, LLC; Residential Funding Company, LLC; Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas; Does I-X lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees _ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis _ Submitted: August 12, 2016 Fil
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-1193 _ Patricia Vylasek; John J. Vylasek lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Services, Inc.; Aurora Loan Services, LLC; Nationstar Mortgage, LLC; Residential Funding Company, LLC; Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas; Does I-X lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees _ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis _ Submitted: August 12, 2016 File..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 16-1193
___________________________
Patricia Vylasek; John J. Vylasek
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants
v.
Mortgage Electronic Registration Services, Inc.; Aurora Loan Services, LLC;
Nationstar Mortgage, LLC; Residential Funding Company, LLC; Deutsche Bank
Trust Company Americas; Does I-X
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
____________
Submitted: August 12, 2016
Filed: August 17, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
John and Patricia Vylasek appeal after the district court1 dismissed their
complaint with prejudice. They also move for this court to take judicial notice of
certain facts.
After careful de novo review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper. See
Anderson-Tully Co. v. McDaniel,
571 F.3d 760, 762 (8th Cir. 2009) (grant of motion
to dismiss is reviewed de novo); see also 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 (diversity jurisdiction);
Park Nicollet Clinic v. Hamann,
808 N.W.2d 828, 833 (Minn. 2011) (elements of
breach-of-contract claim); Paidar v. Hughes,
615 N.W.2d 276, 279-80 (Minn. 2000)
(elements of slander-of-title claim).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny the pending
motion.
______________________________
1
The Honorable Patrick J. Schiltz, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin
L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
-2-