Case ID: f-appx_654/html/0861-01.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

Mark PARKER; Gloria J. Payer, and those Similarly Situated 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 Defendants-Appellees
    No. 15-3673
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 20, 2016
    Filed: July 21, 2016
    Paul W. Madgett, Omaha, NE, for Plaintiffs-Appellants Mark Parker, Gloria J. Payer
    Brandy Rae Johnson, Vincent Valentino, Valentino Law Office, Lincoln, NE, for Defendants-Appellees Thurston County, Darren Wolf, Georgia Maymberry, Leonard Peters, Dan Trimble, Mark English, Shelly Perez
    
      Matthew M. Munderloh, Johnson & Mock, Omaha, NE, for Defendants-Appel-lees Village of Walthill, Mike Grant, Gwen Porter, Vida Stabler, Drew Kingare, Michael Wolfe, Sr., Earlene Hradec, Randy Urbanec
    Cory L. Masi, University of Nebraska, Ryan Post, Assistant Attorney General, Lincoln, NE, for Defendant-Appellee Douglas L. Luebe, State of Nebraska
    Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

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 court 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, 105 S.Ct. 1938, 85 L.Ed.2d 254 (1985), and we conclude also that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying post-judgment 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. 
      
      , The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.