Stuart Auld v. Monica Hansen, et al


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: JAMES B. LOKEN, PASCO M. BOWMAN and STEVEN M. COLLOTON (UNPUBLISHED) [3907333-2] Denying the motion to strike appellees' brief filed by Appellant Mr. Stuart Auld. [3938837] [12-1269]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 12-1269 ___________ Stuart N. Auld, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Frankie Friend & Associates, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Defendant, * * Monica Hansen; Frank Tisby; Norm * Logan; Ann Doe, also known as * Annette Martinez; United States of * America; Gonzales Consulting * Services, Inc.; Williams Professional * Services, LLC; DOI Bureau of Land * Management; Unnamed & Unknown, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: July 25, 2012 Filed: August 3, 2012 ___________ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Appellate Case: 12-1269 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Entry ID: 3938837 Stuart Auld appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of the civil action he brought after he was removed from his position with the Bureau of Land Management. Although he asserted numerous claims under a variety of legal theories, he essentially challenged the merits of his termination, and we conclude that he could not seek review of that personnel action in the district court. See 5 U.S.C. §§ 4303, 7511-7513, 7701, 7703 (Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) procedures for contesting removal, including, for some service categories, appeal to Merit Systems Protection Board and judicial review in Federal Circuit); United States v. Fausto, 484 U.S. 439, 446-50, 455 (1988) (discussing CSRA provisions for administrative and judicial review of personnel actions, and exclusion of certain civil servants from such provisions); Hastings v. Wilson, 516 F.3d 1055, 1058 (8th Cir. 2008) (de novo review). We also conclude that the district court did not err by denying Auld a default judgment, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b), by dismissing the action before a trial, see Duncan v. Dep’t of Labor, 313 F.3d 445, 447 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam), or by denying Auld leave to reassert his claims in light of proposed legislation, see Crest Constr. II, Inc. v. Doe, 660 F.3d 346, 358 (8th Cir. 2011). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We deny Auld’s motion to strike appellees’ brief. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -2- Appellate Case: 12-1269 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Entry ID: 3938837

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?