Daniel Coleman v. Minneapolis Public Schools

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 21-2226
___________________________
Daniel Coleman
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Minneapolis Public Schools
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Minnesota
____________
Submitted: February 14, 2022
Filed: February 17, 2022
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
In this employment action, Daniel Coleman appeals following the district
court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment and denial of his post-judgment motion
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59.
1The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of
Minnesota.

-- 1 of 2 --

We first conclude we lack jurisdiction to review the denial of Coleman’s post-
judgment motion. See Miles v. Gen. Motors Corp., 262 F.3d 720, 722-23 (8th Cir.
2001) (this court lacks jurisdiction to consider challenge to denial of post-judgment
motion for new trial where movant failed to file amended notice of appeal as to that
decision). After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal,
we further conclude the adverse grant of summary judgment was proper for the
reasons articulated by the district court. See EEOC v. Prod. Fabricators, Inc., 763
F.3d 963, 969 (8th Cir. 2014) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th
Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Coleman’s pending motion.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --