Court Opinion

ID: 9382011
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-24 16:00:37.6241+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:36.616149
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                          For the Eighth Circuit
                      ___________________________

                              No. 22-2342
                      ___________________________

                                Shavonda Smith

                     lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                                        v.

 Paxton Media Group, LLC; David M. Paxton, President and CEO, Individually
                        and in his official capacity

                    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
                                     ____________

                  Appeal from United States District Court
                for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Northern
                                ____________

                          Submitted: March 21, 2023
                            Filed: March 24, 2023
                                [Unpublished]
                                ____________

Before COLLOTON, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.
      Shavonda Smith appeals following the district court’s1 adverse grant of
summary judgment in her counseled civil action. After careful review of the record
and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we affirm.

       We conclude that the district court properly dismissed Smith’s claim under the
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), as she failed to state
a civil RICO claim. See Waters v. Madson, 921 F.3d 725, 734 (8th Cir. 2019)
(dismissal for failure to state claim is reviewed de novo). As to the district court’s
denial of Smith’s motion for a stay pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d),
we find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s ruling, or in the court’s denial of
Smith’s subsequent motion for reconsideration. See Toben v. Bridgestone Retail
Operations, LLC, 751 F.3d 888, 894 (8th Cir. 2014) (district court’s denial of Rule
56(d) motion is reviewed for abuse of discretion); Peterson v. Travelers Indem. Co.,
867 F.3d 992, 997 (8th Cir. 2017) (reviewing ruling on motion for reconsideration for
abuse of discretion). Finally, we conclude that summary judgment was proper as to
Smith’s remaining claims. See Said v. Mayo Clinic, 44 F.4th 1142, 1147 (8th Cir.
2022) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo). Accordingly, we affirm.
See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
                        ______________________________

      1
       The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Arkansas.

                                           -2-