Case Name: Eugene SMITH, Appellant, v. EAST ARKANSAS VIDEO, INC., Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-05-08
Citations: 276 F. App'x 542
Docket Number: No. 07-1981
Parties: Eugene SMITH, Appellant, v. EAST ARKANSAS VIDEO, INC., Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 276
Pages: 542–542

Head Matter:
Eugene SMITH, Appellant, v. EAST ARKANSAS VIDEO, INC., Appellee.
No. 07-1981.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: May 7, 2008.
Filed: May 8, 2008.
Eugene Smith, Forrest City, AR, pro se.
Clayborne S. Stone, Philip S. Anderson, Williams & Anderson, Little Rock, AR, for Appellee.
Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
[UNPUBLISHED]
PER CURIAM.
Eugene Smith appeals the district court's adverse grant of judgment on the pleadings on his civil suit brought against defendant in connection with its allegedly unsatisfactory television and internet service to Smith. After careful de novo review, see Stalley ex rel. United States v. Catholic Health Initiatives, 509 F.3d 517, 521 (8th Cir.2007); Westcott v. City of Omaha, 901 F.2d 1486, 1488 (8th Cir.1990), we conclude that dismissal of the federal claims was proper. We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying appointment of counsel, see Phillips v. Jasper County Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794 (8th Cir.2006) (standard of review), or preliminary injunctive relief, see Blue Moon Entm't, LLC v. City of Bates City, Mo., 441 F.3d 561, 564 (8th Cir.2006) (standard of review). Finally, the court also did not abuse its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Smith's state law claims, which the court properly dismissed without prejudice. See Labickas v. Ark. State Univ., 78 F.3d 333, 334-35 (8th Cir.1996) (per curiam).
The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.