Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02728/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02728-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mike Hatch
Appellee
Jennifer S. Kenney
Appellee
Barbara E. Olson
Appellant
Bradley W. Olson
Appellant
State of Minnesota
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Raymond L. Erickson, United States Magistrate Judge for the

District of Minnesota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent

of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-2728

___________

Bradley W. Olson; Barbara E. Olson, *

*

Appellants, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Jennifer S. Kenney, Assistant Attorney *

General for the State of Minnesota; * [UNPUBLISHED]

Mike Hatch, Attorney General of the *

State of Minnesota, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: March 30, 2005

Filed: April 4, 2005

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Bradley and Barbara Olson (Olsons) appeal the district court’s1

 denial of their

motion for default judgment and the dismissal of their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We

affirm.

Appellate Case: 04-2728 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/04/2005 Entry ID: 1886651 
2

District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983);

Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923).

-2-

In their complaint, the Olsons alleged that Assistant Attorney General Jennifer

Kenney, relying on state law, prohibited two government officials from testifying in

the Olsons’ state civil trial and barred access to the investigative reports of these

officials, in violation of the Olsons’ constitutional rights. The Olsons requested a

new civil trial, an order permitting them to call the officials as witnesses, and punitive

damages. 

Defendants moved to dismiss eighteen days after receipt of service. The

Olsons moved for default judgment, arguing that defendants had failed to reply within

ten days as required by local rule and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(d). The

district court denied the Olsons’ motion for default judgment and granted defendants’

motion to dismiss. 

We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to order

a default judgment, given that defendants filed a timely motion to dismiss, which the

district court granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A), (a)(4)(A); Norsyn, Inc. v.

Desai, 351 F.3d 825, 828 (8th Cir. 2003). We also conclude the court did not err in

dismissing the Olsons’ complaint, because the Rooker-Feldman doctrine2

 precludes

their request for a new state civil trial, see Lemonds v. St. Louis County, 222 F.3d

488, 492-93 (8th Cir. 2000), and the Eleventh Amendment precludes their request for

punitive damages as defendants were sued only in their official capacities, see

Johnson v. Outboard Marine Corp., 172 F.3d 531, 535 (8th Cir. 1999); Treleven v.

Univ. of Minn., 73 F.3d 816, 818 (8th Cir. 1996). 

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-2728 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/04/2005 Entry ID: 1886651