The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
10-3068•Penford Corporation v. Natl. Union Fire Insurance Co.
10-3068Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitNov 29, 2011
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 11-1591
___________
Ronald J. Posluns, *
*
Appellant, *
*
v. *
*
Education Management Corporation, * Appeal from the United States
LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of * District Court for the
Education Management Holdings, * Eastern District of Arkansas.
LLC which is a wholly-owned *
subsidiary of Education Management * [UNPUBLISHED]
Corporation; Argosy Education Group, *
Inc.; Argosy University; Argosy *
University Online; Karen Baillie, J.D.; *
Richard M. Belcastro, Ph.D.; Susan *
Burgess; Marguerite Chabau, Ph.D.; *
Teresa Collins-Jones, Ph.D.; Timothy *
Drake, Ph.D.; Adam Fagelson; Rita *
Jensen, Ph.D.; Amanda Kimmel; *
Devitt Kramer, J.D.; Bart Lerner, *
Ed.D.; John R. McKernan, Jr., J.D.; *
Todd S. Nelson; Robert A. *
Niesiobedzki, Ph.D.; Kate Noone; *
William Nowlin, Ph.D.; John T. South, *
III; Shelia Sweeney, Ph.D.; Craig *
Swenson, Ph.D.; Thomas Vonk, *
Ph.D.; Kathryn J. Tooredman, Ph.D.; *
John/Jane Does, 1-100, *
*
Appellees. *
-- 1 of 2 --
___________
Submitted: November 2, 2011
Filed: November 3, 2011
___________
Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Ronald J. Posluns appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to1
remand and dismissing his removed civil diversity action, and the subsequent
summary denial of his numerous post-judgment motions. Upon careful review, we
conclude that the district court properly dismissed the case and denied the remand
motion for the reasons it stated. We further conclude that Posluns’s post-judgment
motions were meritless, and that the district court did not err in denying them
summarily, see Associated Elec. Coop. v. Mid-America Transp. Co., 931 F.2d 1266,
1273 (8th Cir. 1991) (holding that district court did not err in summarily denying
post-judgment motion to alter or amend judgment). Accordingly, we affirm the
judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the1
Eastern District of Arkansas.
-2-
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.