Court Opinion

ID: 2829597
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-08-21 16:00:57.676587+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:10.649618
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 15-1033
                         ___________________________

                James Arthur Cockhren; Margaret Louise Cockhren

                       lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants

                                            v.

                              H. Raymond Terpstra, II

                        lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee
                                       ____________

                     Appeal from United States District Court
                    for the Northern District of Iowa, Waterloo
                                  ____________

                            Submitted: August 18, 2015
                              Filed: August 21, 2015
                                  [Unpublished]
                                  ____________

Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.

       James Cockhren and Margaret Cockhren appeal the district court’s1 dismissal
of their pro se complaint against an attorney. In their complaint, they asserted claims

      1
      The Honorable Edward J. McManus, United States District Judge for the
Northern District of Iowa.
under the Truth in Lending Act, a state-law claim for breach of fiduciary duties, and
a state-law claim for loss of consortium. After careful de novo review, see Levy v.
Ohl, 477 F.3d 988, 991 (8th Cir. 2007) (standard of review), we conclude that the
complaint failed to state a claim, see 15 U.S.C. § 1602(g) (defining “creditor” under
Truth in Lending Act); Shivvers v. Hertz Farm Mgmt., Inc., 595 N.W.2d 476, 479
(Iowa 1999) (discussing attorney’s duty of care); Huber v. Hovey, 501 N.W.2d 53,
57 (Iowa 1993) (discussing loss-of-consortium claim under Iowa law); see also
Fullington v. Pfizer, Inc., 720 F.3d 739, 747 (8th Cir. 2013) (court of appeals may
affirm on any basis supported by record).

      The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
                     ______________________________

                                         -2-