Filed: May 22, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 18-2162 _ Larry Hamilton lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Mark Stodola, In his official capacity as Mayor of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas; City of Little Rock; Brittany Godfrey; Mitchel Jackson; Ditech Financial LLC; Green Tree Servicing LLC; Kamal Ellis; Clean Sweep Management LLC lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock _
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 18-2162 _ Larry Hamilton lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Mark Stodola, In his official capacity as Mayor of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas; City of Little Rock; Brittany Godfrey; Mitchel Jackson; Ditech Financial LLC; Green Tree Servicing LLC; Kamal Ellis; Clean Sweep Management LLC lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock _ ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 18-2162
___________________________
Larry Hamilton
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Mark Stodola, In his official capacity as Mayor of the City of Little Rock,
Arkansas; City of Little Rock; Brittany Godfrey; Mitchel Jackson; Ditech
Financial LLC; Green Tree Servicing LLC; Kamal Ellis; Clean Sweep
Management LLC
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
____________
Submitted: May 17, 2019
Filed: May 22, 2019
[Unpublished]
____________
Before ERICKSON, WOLLMAN, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
In this removed action raising state and federal claims, Larry Hamilton appeals
following the district court’s1 grant of summary judgment on his federal claims, and
remand to state court to address his state law claims. Having carefully reviewed the
evidentiary record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find that the district court
did not err in granting summary judgment on the federal claims and did not abuse its
discretion in remanding the state law claims. See Johnson v. Blaukat,
453 F.3d 1108,
1112 (8th Cir. 2006) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo);
Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill,
484 U.S. 343, 357 (1988) (district court has
discretion to remand a removed case to state court when all federal law claims have
been eliminated and only state claims remain). Accordingly, the judgment is
affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
1
The Honorable D.P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Arkansas.
-2-