Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02172/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02172-0/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. 04-2172

___________

Oscar Stilley, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Betty Dickey, in her official capacity * Eastern District of Arkansas.

as Chief Justice of the Arkansas *

Supreme Court (for the “official” * [UNPUBLISHED]

capacity claims against former Chief *

Justice W. H. “Dub” Arnold); Robert *

Brown, in his individual capacity and in *

his official capacity as a Justice of the *

Arkansas Supreme Court; Tom Glaze, *

in his individual capacity and in his *

official capacity as a Justice of the *

Arkansas Supreme Court; W. H. *

Arnold, in his individual capacity; *

originally sued as W. H. “Dub” *

Arnold; Donald L. Corbin, in his *

individual capacity and in his *

official capacity as a Justice of the *

Arkansas Supreme Court; Annabelle *

Clinton Imber, in her individual *

capacity and in her official capacity as *

a Justice of the Arkansas Supreme *

Court; Jim Hannah, in his individual *

capacity and in his official capacity as *

a Justice of the Arkansas Supreme *

Court, *

*

Appellees. *

Appellate Case: 04-2172 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/11/2005 Entry ID: 1853869 
1

 The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas.

-2-

___________

Submitted: January 6, 2005

Filed: January 11, 2005

___________

Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Oscar Stilley appeals the district court’s1

 dismissal under Younger v. Harris,

401 U.S. 37 (1971), of his 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1988 complaint against

defendant justices of the Arkansas Supreme Court. He also appeals the denial of his

motion for reconsideration. Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that

the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that abstention was

appropriate, and in denying the motion for reconsideration. Accordingly, the

judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-2172 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/11/2005 Entry ID: 1853869