Court Opinion

ID: 9943417
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-23 16:01:46.860343+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:47:02.656307
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                          For the Eighth Circuit
                      ___________________________

                              No. 23-2857
                      ___________________________

                               James E. Clifford

                     lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                                        v.

  Carla Walker, Property Manager; Yarco Company, Inc.; St. Michael Housing
                          Partners Investors I, L.P.

                    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
                                     ____________

                   Appeal from United States District Court
              for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
                               ____________

                        Submitted: February 20, 2024
                          Filed: February 23, 2024
                               [Unpublished]
                               ____________

Before LOKEN, BENTON, and ERICKSON, Circuit Juges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.
      Missouri resident James Clifford appeals following the district court’s1 adverse
grant of summary judgment on his federal housing discrimination and retaliation
claims. On appeal, he refers to claims that were omitted from the operative complaint
or voluntarily dismissed, and he challenges the summary judgment decision.

       After careful review, we conclude the claims omitted from the operative
complaint were abandoned, see In re Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 209 F.3d 1064, 1067 (8th
Cir. 2000) (amended complaint supersedes original complaint); and Clifford may not
seek review of the claims he voluntarily dismissed, see Bowers v. St. Louis Sw. Ry.
Co., 668 F.3d 369, 369 (8th Cir. 1981) (per curiam) (plaintiff generally may not
appeal from order granting voluntarily dismissal). We further conclude the adverse
grant of summary judgment was proper for the reasons explained by the district court.
See Gallagher v. Magner, 619 F.3d 823, 830 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review of grant
of summary judgment, viewing evidence in light most favorable to non-movant).

      Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Clifford’s motion
to supplement the record.
                      ______________________________

      1
       The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.

                                         -2-