United States v. Phillip Brumfield

10-3607Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitJul 31, 2012

Full text

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 12-1486
___________
Jeremiah Johnson, *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the Southern
* District of Iowa.
Mel Foster Co. Insurance, Inc.; *
Suzanne M. Martens, * [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: July 5, 2012
Filed: July 16, 2012
___________
Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Jeremiah Johnson appeals following the district court’s dismissal of his1
complaint. For reversal, he asserts for the first time that the judge was biased against
him, and he argues that the court erred in dismissing his claim under the Privacy Act,
5 U.S.C. § 552a.
The Honorable James E. Gritzner, Chief Judge, United States District Court1
for the Southern District of Iowa.

-- 1 of 2 --

To begin, we need not consider Johnson’s assertion of judicial bias, see In re
Medlock, 406 F.3d 1066, 1073 (8th Cir. 2005) (appellant waived argument that he
was tried by biased judge where he failed to raise issue in district court in accordance
with 28 U.S.C. § 144), but, in any event, we perceive it to be meritless, see Perkins
v. Spivey, 911 F.2d 22, 33 (8th Cir. 1990) (disqualification is appropriate only if facts
would provide objective, knowledgeable member of public with reasonable basis for
doubting judge’s impartiality).
Moreover, following careful de novo review of the dismissal, see Walker v.
Barrett, 650 F.3d 1198, 1203 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review), we agree with the
district court that Johnson failed to state a claim under the Privacy Act, see Unt v.
Aerospace Corp., 765 F.2d 1440, 1447 (9th Cir. 1985) (civil remedy provisions of
Privacy Act do not apply against private individuals and entities); cf. Youngblood v.
Hy-Vee Food Stores, Inc., 266 F.3d 851, 855 (8th Cir. 2001) (private party’s mere
invocation of state legal procedures does not constitute state action).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.