Corey Fondren v. Michael White ( 2021 )

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 20-3217
___________________________
Corey Fondren
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Michael White, Police Officer, Individual Capacity; Unknown Saul, Police
Officer, Individual Capacity; Unknown Mason, Police Officer, Individual
Capacity
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________
Submitted: May 19, 2021
Filed: May 25, 2021
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Corey Fondren appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment
in his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Having reviewed the record and the arguments
on appeal, we conclude that Fondren has waived any challenge to the district court’s
ruling because he does not meaningfully challenge the district court’s bases for
granting the officers’ unopposed summary judgment motion. See Ahlberg v. Chrysler
Corp., 481 F.3d 630, 638 (8th Cir. 2007). To the extent he intended to challenge the
district court’s denial of his motion to be excused from his deposition after he
voluntarily moved out of state during the proceedings, we discern no abuse of
discretion. See Sheets v. Butera, 389 F.3d 772, 780 (8th Cir. 2004). We do not
consider Fondren’s arguments regarding the timing of the summary judgment motion
and Officer Michael White’s absence from Fondren’s deposition, because Fondren
raised those arguments for the first time on appeal without having raised them in the
district court during the proceedings. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir.
2004). In any event, those arguments are contradicted by the record.
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R.
47B.
______________________________
1
The Honorable Jean C. Hamilton, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
-2-