Leonard N. Anderson v. Ed Smith, in his individual capacity

18-3550Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitJul 31, 2020

Full text

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 19-1959
___________________________
Leonard N. Anderson
Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Ed Smith, in his individual capacity and his official capacity for his conduct under
color of law, in the course and scope of his employment, as a City of St. Paul,
Department of Safety Inspections Employee; City of St. Paul, a political
subdivision of the State of Minnesota
Defendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Minnesota
____________
Submitted: June 18, 2020
Filed: July 29, 2020
[Unpublished]
____________
Before KELLY, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Leonard Anderson and the City of St. Paul have had a long-running dispute
over building-code violations on his property. He eventually sued the City and one

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
of its inspectors in federal court. His amended complaint contained two sets of
claims: seven total under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and two more under state law.
The district court1 dismissed the federal claims with prejudice, see Fed. R.
Civ. P. 12(b)(6), and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-
law claims, see 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). Reviewing the dismissal de novo and having
carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, we agree with the district
court that Anderson’s amended complaint fails to state a federal claim. See Kelly v.
City of Omaha, 813 F.3d 1070, 1075 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of review). We
accordingly affirm the judgment.2 See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
1 The Honorable Eric C. Tostrud, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota.
2 We note that the district court’s order states that “Anderson’s state-law
claims” are dismissed without prejudice, but the judgment itself omits one: a trespass
claim (Claim V). If this is a clerical error, the district court can correct it. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 60(a).

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.