Filed: Oct. 21, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-3200 _ Charles Swift lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Wadie Thomas; Matthew Kahler lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees _ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha _ Submitted: October 20, 2016 Filed: October 21, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Charles Swift appeals after the district court1 dismissed, without prejudice,
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-3200 _ Charles Swift lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Wadie Thomas; Matthew Kahler lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees _ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha _ Submitted: October 20, 2016 Filed: October 21, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Charles Swift appeals after the district court1 dismissed, without prejudice, ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 16-3200
___________________________
Charles Swift
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Wadie Thomas; Matthew Kahler
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
____________
Submitted: October 20, 2016
Filed: October 21, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Charles Swift appeals after the district court1 dismissed, without prejudice, his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 complaint requesting that the district court impose directions upon a
1
The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District
of Nebraska.
state-court judge. Upon careful review, and for the reasons stated by the district
court, we conclude that the dismissal was proper. See Moore v. Sims,
200 F.3d 1170,
1171 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) dismissal is reviewed de novo).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-