United States v. Scott Donald Wiele

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 06-1900
___________
The People of the State of Missouri, *
*
Plaintiff, *
*
John M. Oyer, *
*
Appellant, *
*
Michael Johnson; Stephanie L. *
Waughtal, *
*
Plaintiffs, *
*
v. * Appeals from the United States
* District Court for the
State of Missouri, Kansas City, * Western District of Missouri.
Municipality Codes Administration *
Department, Neighborhood Community * [UNPUBLISHED]
Service Department; Leon Ford, *
Individually & capacity of law; Nick *
Domann, Individually & capacity of *
law; Virginia Lewis-Brunk, *
Individually & corp capacity; Patricia *
Murray, Individually & corporate *
capacity; Magistrate Wayne Cagle; *
Leron Ford; Lowell Gard; City of *
Kansas City, Codes Administration *
Department; Kansas City, Inc.; Lorna *
Kindred; Magistrate Joseph Locascio; *
Neighborhood Community Service *
Department, *
*
Appellees. *

-- 1 of 3 --

-2-
___________
No. 06-2292
___________
The People of the State of Missouri; *
John M. Oyer, *
*
Plaintiff, *
*
Michael Johnson, *
*
Appellant, *
*
Stephanie L. Waughtal, *
*
Plaintiff, *
*
v. *
*
State of Missouri, Kansas City, *
Municipality Codes Administration *
Department, Neighborhood Community *
Service Department; Leon Ford, *
Individually & capacity of law; Nick *
Domann, Individually & capacity of *
law; Virginia Lewis-Brunk, *
Individually & corp capacity; Patricia *
Murray, Individually & corporate *
capacity; Magistrate Wayne Cagle; *
Leron Ford; Lowell Gard; City of *
Kansas City, Codes Administration *
Department; Kansas City, Inc.; Lorna *
Kindred; Magistrate Joseph Locascio; *
Neighborhood Community Service *
Department, *
*
Appellees. *

-- 2 of 3 --

¹ The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.
-3-
___________
Submitted: October 3, 2007
Filed: October 12, 2007
___________
Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
John Oyer and Michael Johnson appeal the district court’s 1 orders dismissing
their civil-rights action for failure to state a claim and failure to provide proof of
service, and denying their motions for reconsideration and relief from judgment.
Having carefully reviewed the entire district court file, we deny appellants’ motion to
supplement the record. We affirm the judgment for the reasons the district court
provided in its various rulings. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________

-- 3 of 3 --