Case Name: Louis Jonathan CUTWRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Sean CRAWFORD; Sheryl Dahm; Tracy Dietsch; Cindy Wolmutt; William Sperfslage, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-03-17
Citations: 596 F. App'x 526
Docket Number: No. 14-3125
Parties: Louis Jonathan CUTWRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Sean CRAWFORD; Sheryl Dahm; Tracy Dietsch; Cindy Wolmutt; William Sperfslage, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before BYE, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 596
Pages: 526–526

Head Matter:
Louis Jonathan CUTWRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Sean CRAWFORD; Sheryl Dahm; Tracy Dietsch; Cindy Wolmutt; William Sperfslage, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-3125.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: March 16, 2015.
Filed: March 17, 2015.
Louis Jonathan Cutwright, Anamosa, IA, pro se.
Before BYE, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Louis Cutwright appeals after the district court dismissed his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint preservice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and denied his post-judgment motion for reconsideration. Upon careful review, we find no basis for reversal. See Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir.1999) (per curiam) (de novo review of § 1915A dismissal); see also Ackerland, v. United States, 633 F.3d 698, 701 (8th Cir.2011) (appellate court typically construes self-styled motion for reconsideration as Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment, or as Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion for relief from judgment); Miller v. Baker Implement Co., 439 F.3d 407, 414 (8th Cir.2006) (appellate court reviews denial of motions under Rule 59(e) or 60(b) for abuse of discretion).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable John A. Jarvey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.