Leonard Noble v. Gunner Delay, et al


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Steven M. Colloton, Raymond W. Gruender and Jane Kelly (UNPUBLISHED) [4425911] [15-3624]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-3624 ___________________________ Leonard Noble lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Gunner Delay, Prosecuting Attorney, Sebastian County; Daniel Shue, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, Sebastian County lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Ft. Smith ____________ Submitted: July 7, 2016 Filed: July 14, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Appellate Case: 15-3624 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/14/2016 Entry ID: 4425911 Leonard Noble appeals after the district court1 dismissed his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 complaint and denied his discovery-related motion. After careful review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper, see Gunter v. Farmers Ins. Co., 736 F.3d 768, 771 (8th Cir. 2013) (grant of motion to dismiss for failure to state claim is reviewed de novo), and that Noble was appropriately denied an opportunity to conduct discovery, see Steinbuch v. Cutler, 518 F.3d 580, 591 (8th Cir. 2008) (court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow discovery where complaint lacked sufficient allegations to state claim). The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable P.K. Holmes, III, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Mark E. Ford, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. -2- Appellate Case: 15-3624 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/14/2016 Entry ID: 4425911

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?