Case ID: f-appx_515/html/0633-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Elsie M. MAYARD, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Anthony TALLARICO; Carlos Wong; Chad Slagter; City of St. Paul, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 12-3274.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 17, 2013.
    Filed: July 19, 2013.
    Elsie M. Mayard, St. Paul, MN, pro se.
    Cheri M. Sisk, City Attorney’s Office, St. Paul, MN, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before WOLLMAN, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Elsie M. Mayard appeals following the district court’s adverse entry of judgment on a jury verdict in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, and the court’s subsequent denial of her motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. Having reviewed the arguments raised in the Rule 59 motion, to the extent possible without a transcript of the three-day jury trial, this court finds no clear abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of the Rule 59 motion. See Children’s Broadcasting Corp. v. Walt Disney Co., 357 F.3d 860, 866-67 (8th Cir.2004); Schmid v. United Bhd. of Carpenters and Joiners of Am., 827 F.2d 384, 385-86 (8th Cir.1987) (per curiam). And having carefully reviewed the arguments for reversal raised in Ma-yard’s brief, this court finds no other reversible error in these proceedings.

This court affirms. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 
      
      . The Honorable Arthur J. Boylan, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
     
      
      . In her brief, Mayard mentions or alludes to certain other claims, but she stipulated to the dismissal of those claims before trial, so they will not be considered.