Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-03-02044/USCOURTS-ca8-03-02044-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-2044

___________

David P. Honan, in his capacity as * 

Cottonwood County Attorney and *

in his individual capacity, * 

 * 

 Appellant, *

*

 v. *

*

County of Cottonwood, Minnesota; *

Marvin Einertsen, Former *

Commissioner, in his individual *

and then-official capacities; Kenneth * 

Elg, Commissioner, in his individual * Appeal from the United States

and official capacities; Wendy * District Court for the District

Meyer, Former Commissioner, in her * of Minnesota. 

individual and then-official capacities; *

Marlow Nelsen, Commissioner, * [UNPUBLISHED]

in his individual and official capacities; * 

John Oeltjenbruns, Commissioner, * 

in his individual and official capacities; * 

Cottonwood County Board of * 

Commissioners 2001-2003 Term; * 

Brian T. Pierce, an individual; * 

Scott T. Anderson, an individual; *

Ratwik, Roszak & *

Maloney, P.A., *

*

 Appellees. *

Appellate Case: 03-2044 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/26/2004 Entry ID: 1760481 
-2-

___________

Submitted: February 13, 2004

Filed: April 26, 2004

___________

Before MELLOY, MCMILLIAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM. 

David Honan ran for county attorney of Cottonwood County, Minnesota,

during the fall of 1998. His platform urged a more open and accountable county

government, reform of the county's family services agency, and an overhaul of the

county attorney's office. Honan won the election, and was sworn in as county

attorney in January 1999. After the election, but prior to Honan taking office, the

county board reduced the salary of the county attorney and eliminated a rent subsidy

that had been part of the office's budget during the term of Honan's predecessor.

Honan believed that these actions were taken in retaliation for statements he made

during his campaign. During the year after Honan was sworn in, there were personnel

problems in the county attorney's office. These problems prompted investigations,

which Honan also believed were retaliatory. 

Honan brought suit against the county board and its members, along with

others involved in the various events that he believed violated his rights. He alleged

that he was retaliated against for exercising his constitutional rights to freedom of

speech and association, and to petition the government. Honan claimed that his rights

to equal protection and due process, and his constitutional right "to pursue the career

for which he was trained," were violated. He further alleged that appellees conspired

against him in an attempt to prevent him from taking, holding, and discharging the

duties of his office, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985(1). Honan included several state

Appellate Case: 03-2044 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/26/2004 Entry ID: 1760481 
1

The Honorable Joan N. Ericksen, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota. 

-3-

law claims over which the district court1

 exercised supplemental jurisdiction. The

district court granted appellees' motions to dismiss Honan's federal claims, which the

district court treated as motions for judgment on the pleadings, see Fed. R. Civ. P.

12(c), and dismissed the state law claims without prejudice, see 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c).

Honan timely appealed.

After carefully reviewing the record de novo, see Burton v. Richmond, 276

F.3d 973, 975 (8th Cir. 2002) (standard of review), we conclude that the district court

properly dismissed Honan's action. The issues are thoroughly discussed in the district

court's 24-page order. Having nothing to add, we summarily affirm. See 8th Cir. R.

47B.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 03-2044 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/26/2004 Entry ID: 1760481