Kalvin Loyd, et al v. James Corwin, et al

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Raymond W. Gruender, Duane Benton and Jane Kelly (UNPUBLISHED) [4350853] [14-2897]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 14-2897
___________________________
Kalvin M. Loyd; Patricia Loyd
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants
Kaltrice Loyd; Patrick Loyd, by and through Next Friend Patricia Thomas Loyd.;
Jarvis M. Loyd, by and through Next Friend Patricia Thomas Loyd.; Patrice M.
Loyd, by and through Next Friend Patricia Thomas Loyd.; Patricia A. Loyd, by
and through Next Friend Patricia Thomas Loyd.
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs
v.
James Corwin; Chief Darryl Forte
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
City of Kansas City, Missouri
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant
Board of Police Commissioners; Charles Huth; Robert Richardson; Barry Nolan;
Chad Fenwick; Mary Bickford; Joseph Daneff; Scott A. Selock; Chad E. Safranek;
Garrett D. Polich; Douglas G. Silk; Guy E. Kirtley; Keith M. Ericsson; Eric J.
Roeder; Robert E. Browning, Jr.; Granvel E. Greenwell; Michael L. Glass; Justin
E. Crump; Owen Farris; Larry Weinhold; Robert Evans; Aaron Hendershot; John
Keil; Robert Wisdom; Kip Akerson; Richard R. Buente, #3061; Michael Miller,
#4024; Richard Dyer
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
____________

Appellate Case: 14-2897

Page: 1

Date Filed: 12/30/2015 Entry ID: 4350853

Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: December 28, 2015
Filed: December 30, 2015
____________
Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
In this properly removed action, Kalvin and Patricia Loyd appeal after the
district court1 dismissed their civil rights complaint, without prejudice, for failure to
prosecute. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its
discretion in dismissing the complaint. See Garland v. Peebles, 1 F.3d 683, 686 (8th
Cir. 1993) (dismissal for failure to prosecute is reviewed for abuse of discretion;
dismissal is proper when there has been clear record of delay by plaintiff). We
additionally conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the
Loyds’ motion for appointment of counsel. See Phillips v. Jasper Cty. Jail, 437 F.3d
791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006) (denial of motion for appointment of counsel is reviewed for
abuse of discretion; discussing relevant factors).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________

1

The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.
-2-

Appellate Case: 14-2897

Page: 2

Date Filed: 12/30/2015 Entry ID: 4350853