United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-2630

___________

Eric C. Burgie, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Larry Norris, Director, Arkansas *

Department of Correction; Grant Harris, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Warden, Varner Unit, ADC; Edwin *

Brown, Jr., CO-II, Varner Super Max, *

ADC; Kim Luckett, Assistant Warden, *

Varner Super Max, ADC; Suber, Lt., *

Varner Super Max, ADC; Ray Hobbs, *

Chief Deputy Director of ADC; *

Tiffanye Compton, Grievance *

Supervisor; Timmothy Hurst, Assistant *

Warden of ADC, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: March 5, 2010

Filed: March 31, 2010

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

In 2007, Arkansas inmate Eric Burgie filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint

against several Arkansas Department of Correction employees. In December 2008,
1

The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable

Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of

Arkansas.

-2-

Burgie filed through counsel a motion to dismiss the action, indicating that he had

entered into a settlement agreement with defendants. In January 2009, Burgie

objected to the motion to dismiss. The district court1

 dismissed the action with

prejudice, finding that Burgie knowingly and voluntarily entered into the settlement

agreement. Burgie appeals, asking that the case be remanded for further proceedings,

and arguing that defendants violated and undermined the settlement agreement by

transferring him to a different unit before the agreement became effective.

We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in finding that Burgie had

entered into a settlement agreement. See Chaganti & Assocs., P.C. v. Nowotny, 470

F.3d 1215, 1221 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review). Nothing in the record indicates

that Burgie was not competent to enter into the settlement agreement, or that he did

not enter into the agreement knowingly and voluntarily. See id. (basic principles of

contract law govern existence and enforcement of alleged settlement; applying

Missouri law to determine whether settlement agreement existed where parties agreed

Missouri law governed); City of Dardanelle v. City of Russellville, 277 S.W.3d 562,

565-66 (Ark. 2008) (listing essential elements of contract). To the extent Burgie seeks

to avoid the settlement agreement by asserting that his early transfer undermined his

reasons for entering the agreement, we conclude his argument fails. See Bishop v.

Bishop, 961 S.W.2d 770, 775 (Ark. Ct. App. 1998) (there can be no rescission of

contract on account of mistake of one party only, where other party was not guilty of

any fraud, concealment, undue influence, or bad faith, and did not induce or encourage

mistake, and will not derive any unconscionable advantage from enforcement of

contract); see also Worthy v. McKesson Corp., 756 F.2d 1370, 1373 (8th Cir. 1985)

(per curiam) (parties to voluntary settlement agreement cannot avoid agreement

simply because agreement ultimately proves to be disadvantageous). Further, contrary
-3-

to Burgie’s argument, we conclude that nothing in the settlement agreement prohibited

defendants from transferring him before the agreement became effective.

 

Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal. 

______________________________