Mark Parker, et al v. Thurston County, Nebraska, et al


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Duane Benton and Jane Kelly (UNPUBLISHED) [4428544] [15-3673]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-3673 ___________________________ Mark Parker; Gloria J. Payer, and those Similarly Situated lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants v. Thurston County, Nebraska; Caroline Frenchman; Darren Wolf; Georgia Maymberry; Leonard Peters; Greg Jump; Dan Trimble; Mark English; Village of Walthill, an Entity within the Omaha Reservation and within Thurston County, Nebraska; Mike Grant; Gwen Porter; Vida Stabler; Drew Kingare; Michael Wolfe, Sr.; Earlene Hradec; Randy Urbanec; Douglas L. Luebe; Nora H. Goll; Shelly Perez; State of Nebraska lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha ____________ Submitted: July 20, 2016 Filed: July 21, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Appellate Case: 15-3673 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/21/2016 Entry ID: 4428544 In May 2015, Mark Parker and Gloria Payer filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 against the State of Nebraska; Thurston County, Nebraska; the Village of Walthill; and various individuals associated with these entities. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants violated their civil rights by questioning, arresting, prosecuting, and jailing plaintiffs--without jurisdiction--for offenses they committed while driving on roads within the Omaha Tribal Reservation. The district court1 granted defendants’ unopposed Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motions, and denied plaintiffs’ Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a)(2) postjudgment motion. Following de novo review of the grant of the motion to dismiss, see Adams v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 813 F.3d 1151, 1154 (8th Cir. 2016), and careful review of the parties’ submissions on appeal, we agree with the district court that the complaint is untimely under the four-year limitations period set out in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-207, see Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 280 (1985), and we conclude also that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying postjudgment relief, see Stults v. Am. Pop Corn Co., 815 F.3d 409, 414 (8th Cir. 2016); Arnold v. Wood, 238 F.3d 992, 998 (8th Cir. 2001). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. -2- Appellate Case: 15-3673 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/21/2016 Entry ID: 4428544

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?