Case Name: Lindsey K. SPRINGER, Appellant, v. SPRINGFIELD BUSINESS JOURNAL; Martin Dingman; Shane Grady, Matt Wagner, Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-02-04
Citations: 364 F. App'x 296
Docket Number: No. 09-1410
Parties: Lindsey K. SPRINGER, Appellant, v. SPRINGFIELD BUSINESS JOURNAL; Martin Dingman; Shane Grady, Matt Wagner, Appellees.
Judges: Before BYE, RILEY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 364
Pages: 296–297

Head Matter:
Lindsey K. SPRINGER, Appellant, v. SPRINGFIELD BUSINESS JOURNAL; Martin Dingman; Shane Grady, Matt Wagner, Appellees.
No. 09-1410.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 29, 2010.
Filed: Feb. 4, 2010.
Before BYE, RILEY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Lindsey Springer appeals the district court's adverse judgment in his diversity action alleging defamation. After careful review, we find his arguments to be without merit. See Schaaf v. Residential Funding Corp., 517 F.3d 544, 549 (8th Cir.) (de novo standard of review for Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 222, 172 L.Ed.2d 142 (2008), Johnson v. Blaukat, 453 F.3d 1108, 1112 (8th Cir.2006) (de novo standard of review for summary judgment decision); Pony Computer, Inc. v. Equus Computer Sys. of Mo., 162 F.3d 991, 996 (8th Cir.1998) (determination that claim is ripe for summary judgment is reviewed for abuse of discretion); Perkins v. Spivey, 911 F.2d 22, 28 n. 6 (8th Cir.1990) (noting that otherwise proper ruling is not erroneous merely because it has incidental effect of precluding jury trial). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Sarah W. Hays, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).