Filed: May 14, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 18-2988 _ Brad S. Francis; Christine C. Francis lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellants v. United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: May 9, 2019 Filed: May 14, 2019 [Unpublished] _ Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Brad and Christine Francis appeal the district court’
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 18-2988 _ Brad S. Francis; Christine C. Francis lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellants v. United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: May 9, 2019 Filed: May 14, 2019 [Unpublished] _ Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Brad and Christine Francis appeal the district court’s..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 18-2988
___________________________
Brad S. Francis; Christine C. Francis
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellants
v.
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: May 9, 2019
Filed: May 14, 2019
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Brad and Christine Francis appeal the district court’s1 dismissal, for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction, of their civil suit challenging their liability for federal
1
The Honorable Greg Kays, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.
taxes and penalties. Having carefully reviewed the record and the Francises’
arguments on appeal, we conclude the court did not err in dismissing the complaint,
see Laclede Gas Co. v. St. Charles Cnty., Mo.,
713 F.3d 413, 417 (8th Cir. 2013) (de
novo review of dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction); and that the district
court judge did not err by failing to sua sponte recuse himself, see United States v.
Melton,
738 F.3d 903, 905 (8th Cir. 2013) (when raised for the first time on appeal,
decision not to recuse is reviewed for plain error). Accordingly, we affirm, see 8th
Cir. R. 47B, and we deny the pending appellate motion.
______________________________
-2-