Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-16-01435/USCOURTS-ca8-16-01435-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Kenneth M. Njema
Appellant
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-1435

___________________________

Kenneth M. Njema,

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.,

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee.

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis

____________

 Submitted: January 5, 2017

Filed: January 26, 2017

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

In this action challenging the foreclosure of his home, Kenneth Njema appeals

after the district court entered summary judgment against himon his claims of breach 1

The Honorable Patrick J. Schiltz, United States District Judge for the District 1

of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Janie S.

Appellate Case: 16-1435 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/26/2017 Entry ID: 4494234 
of contract, intentional misrepresentation, wrongful foreclosure, and intentional

infliction of emotional distress, and dismissed his remaining trespass claim without

prejudice, for failure to prosecute.

Following a careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal,

we agree with the district court’s disposition of Njema’s claims. See Burger v. Allied

Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 822 F.3d 445, 447 (8th Cir. 2016) (summary judgment

decisions are reviewed de novo); Lexington Ins. Co. v. Integrity Land Title Co., Inc.,

721 F.3d 958, 968 (8th Cir. 2013) (stay-related rulings are reviewed for abuse of

discretion); Fleming v. Harris, 39 F.3d 905, 908 (8th Cir. 1994) (rulings related to

requests by counsel to withdraw are reviewed for abuse of discretion).

2

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

Mayeron, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

We decline to consider points that Njema mentions on appeal, but does not

2

meaningfully argue in his opening brief, see Ahlberg v. ChryslerCorp., 481 F.3d 630,

638 (8th Cir. 2007); French v. Board, 993 F.2d 160, 161 (8th Cir. 1993), and

arguments that he asserts on appeal, but did not properly present in the summary

judgment proceedings, see B.M. ex rel. Miller v. S. Callway R-II Sch. Dist., 732 F.3d

882, 887 (8th Cir. 2012). 

-2-

Appellate Case: 16-1435 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/26/2017 Entry ID: 4494234