Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-01896/USCOURTS-ca8-06-01896-0/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

___________

Nos. 06-1896/3058

___________

Michael D. Van Deelen, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

* Appeals from the United States

City of Kansas City, Missouri; * District Court for the

Wayne Cauthen; John Franklin; * Western District of Missouri.

John Thigpen; Gail Roper; Richard *

Razniak, Beth Lacey; Rick Brisbin; * [UNPUBLISHED]

Roy Greenway; Patrick Reisenbichler; *

City of Kansas City, Missouri Human *

Resources Board; Joseph Moreland; *

Margaret Evans; Lawrence Franklin; *

John Doe, (1-10); Jane Doe, (1-10), *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: October 5, 2007

Filed: October 19, 2007

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 06-1896 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/19/2007 Entry ID: 3363799
1

The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

-2-

In these consolidated appeals, Michael Van Deelen appeals the district court’s1

adverse judgment in his action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged

constitutional violations with regard to the termination of his employment with the

City of Kansas City, Missouri, for violation of its residency requirement. Following

careful review, we affirm the district court’s grant of judgment for defendants on all

of Van Deelen’s claims based on the court’s well-reasoned opinions. See 8th Cir. R.

47B.

Van Deelen also appeals the district court’s order imposing sanctions for his

conduct during trial of the matter. We affirm, but we modify the sanctions order. We

find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the monetary

sanction of $6,000. See Bass v. Gen. Motors Corp., 150 F.3d 842, 851 (8th Cir. 1998)

(standard of review of court’s sanctions under inherent authority); MHC Investment

Co. v. Racom Corp., 323 F.3d 620, 624 (8th Cir. 2003) (standard of review for

sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11). After finding that Van Deelen had filed the

lawsuit maliciously to vex and annoy the City, the court also enjoined Van Deelen

from filing any future pro se litigation against the City, or its agents and employees,

and ordered him to obtain counsel within 30 days in any pending litigation against the

City or its agents and employees arising out of his termination or any related matter,

or to dismiss the matter. While we agree with the district court that some filing

restrictions were appropriate, see Ruderer v. United States, 462 F.2d 897, 899 (8th Cir.

1972) (per curiam), we modify the injunction to apply only to actions filed in federal

district courts within this circuit. See Sieverding v. Colorado Bar Ass’n, 469 F.3d

1340, 1344-45 (10th Cir. 2006) (district court erred in placing filing restrictions on

federal district courts outside Tenth Circuit, state courts, and courts of appeals). 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-1896 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/19/2007 Entry ID: 3363799