Court Opinion

ID: 4710260
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-08-10 16:01:22.870196+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:07:02.375357
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
           For the Eighth Circuit
       ___________________________

               No. 20-3487
       ___________________________

                    Brock Fredin

       lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                          v.

             Lindsey E. Middlecamp

      lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
        ___________________________

               No. 20-3513
       ___________________________

                    Brock Fredin

       lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                          v.

Grace Elizabeth Miller; Catherine Marie Schaefer

     lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
        ___________________________

               No. 20-3516
       ___________________________

                    Brock Fredin

       lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
                          v.

Grace Elizabeth Miller; Catherine Marie Schaefer

     lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
        ___________________________

               No. 20-3525
       ___________________________

                    Brock Fredin

       lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                          v.

             Lindsey E. Middlecamp

      lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
        ___________________________

               No. 20-3528
       ___________________________

                    Brock Fredin

       lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                          v.

                     Jamie Kreil

      lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
        ___________________________

                          -2-
         No. 21-1132
 ___________________________

             Brock Fredin

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                   v.

              Jamie Kreil

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
  ___________________________

         No. 21-1134
 ___________________________

             Brock Fredin

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                   v.

      Lindsey E. Middlecamp

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
  ___________________________

         No. 21-1135
 ___________________________

             Brock Fredin

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                   -3-
                                           v.

                 Grace Elizabeth Miller; Catherine Marie Schaefer

                       lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
                                        ____________

                     Appeals from United States District Court
                           for the District of Minnesota
                                   ____________

                             Submitted: August 3, 2021
                              Filed: August 10, 2021
                                   [Unpublished]
                                  ____________

Before LOKEN, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.

      In these consolidated appeals from his actions raising state law claims based
on diversity jurisdiction, Brock Fredin challenges the district court’s1 orders (1)
denying his motion to extend the discovery deadline; (2) granting summary judgment
in favor of defendants; (3) imposing an injunction relating to certain videos and
websites involving defendants, their counsel, and the district court; (4) ordering him
to show cause why he did not comply with the injunction; and (5) declaring him a
vexatious litigant and imposing filing restrictions.2 After careful review of the record

      1
       The Honorable Susan Richard Nelson, United States District Judge for the
District of Minnesota.
      2
       To the extent Fredin intended to challenge any other matters, he has waived
the opportunity to do so. See Hess v. Ables, 714 F.3d 1048, 1051 n.2 (8th Cir. 2013)
(where dismissal of claim is not challenged on appeal, claim is abandoned); Hacker

                                          -4-
and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no basis for reversal. See Jackson v.
Reibold, 815 F.3d 1114, 1119 (8th Cir. 2016) (summary judgment standard of
review); Life Plus Int’l v. Brown, 317 F.3d 799, 806 (8th Cir. 2003) (district court’s
decisions concerning its management of discovery process are reviewed for abuse of
discretion); Bass v. Gen. Motors Corp., 150 F.3d 842, 851 (8th Cir. 1998) (standard
of review of court’s sanctions under inherent authority); In re Tyler, 839 F.2d 1290,
1290-91, 1290-95 (8th Cir. 1988) (per curiam) (upholding filing limitation on
plaintiff who abused judicial process; courts have a “clear obligation” to exercise
their authority to protect litigants from harassing, abusive, and meritless litigation).

      Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
                     ______________________________

v. Barnhart, 459 F.3d 934, 937 n.2 (8th Cir. 2006) (issue is deemed abandoned where
party does not raise it in appellate brief).

                                          -5-