Kimberly Ann Smith v. Menard, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 23-2657
___________________________
Kimberly Ann Smith
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Menard, Inc.
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern
____________
Submitted: May 17, 2024
Filed: May 24, 2024
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Kimberly Smith appeals after the district court1 entered judgment pursuant to
an adverse jury verdict in her pro se negligence action. After careful review of the
1The Honorable Stephen B. Jackson, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the
Southern District of Iowa, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by
consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

record and consideration of the issues properly before us, we find no basis for
reversal. We conclude the district court did not err in ruling on the admissibility of
certain evidence and testimony, see Vogt v. State Farm Life Ins. Co., 963 F.3d 753,
770-71 (8th Cir. 2020) (abuse of discretion review of evidentiary rulings), refusing
to strike a juror for cause, see Moran v. Clarke, 443 F.3d 646, 650 (8th Cir. 2006)
(abuse of discretion review of denial of strike for cause), and denying her motions for
contempt and for a spoliation instruction, see Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Cuker
Interactive, LLC, 27 F.4th 622, 624 (8th Cir. 2022) (abuse of discretion review of
denial of contempt order); Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Wade, 485 F.3d 1032, 1035 (8th
Cir. 2007) (abuse of discretion review of decision on spoliation sanction). We find
no merit to Smith’s remaining arguments.
The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We deny Smith’s pending
motions.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --