Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

In Re: Stephen Young v., 00-2646 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 00-2646 Visitors: 9
Filed: Jun. 05, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 00-2646 _ In re: Stephen B. Young, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Petitioner. * District of Minnesota * [UNPUBLISHED] _ Submitted: March 16, 2001 Filed: June 5, 2001 _ Before MURPHY, LAY, and BYE, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Steven B. Young, on behalf of his clients Associated Contract Loggers, Inc., and Olson Logging, Inc., filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the District of Minnesota against
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 00-2646 ___________ In re: Stephen B. Young, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Petitioner. * District of Minnesota * [UNPUBLISHED] ___________ Submitted: March 16, 2001 Filed: June 5, 2001 ___________ Before MURPHY, LAY, and BYE, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Steven B. Young, on behalf of his clients Associated Contract Loggers, Inc., and Olson Logging, Inc., filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the District of Minnesota against the United States Forest Service and two not-for-profit groups, Forest Guardians and Superior Wilderness Action Network. See Associated Contract Loggers, Inc., et al. v. United States Forest Service, et al., No 99-CV-1485. The suit alleged a violation of the Establishment Clause. After dismissing the suit pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), the district court1 ordered Young to show cause as to why sanctions should not be imposed against him for initiating a lawsuit without any reasonable basis in law. After considering Young's brief in response to the Show 1 The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. Cause order, the district court imposed sanctions of $5,000 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. Young appeals. Finding that no error of law appears in the district court's opinion, and that further opinion would have no precedential value, we affirm without discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -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