Burke v. North Dakota Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 09-2597
    ___________
    Dale J. Burke,                             *
    *
    Appellant,                    *
    *   Appeal from the United States
    v.                                   *   District Court for the
    *   District of North Dakota.
    North Dakota Department of                 *
    Corrections and Rehabilitation; Tim        *   [UNPUBLISHED]
    Schuetzle, in his official capacity as     *
    Warden of North Dakota State               *
    Penitentiary; Pat Branson, in his          *
    official capacity as Deputy Warden of      *
    North Dakota State Penitentiary;           *
    Kathy Bachmeier, in her official           *
    capacity as Medical Director of            *
    North Dakota State Penitentiary; J.        *
    Peterson, in his official capacity as      *
    Correctional Officer at North Dakota       *
    State Penitentiary; Ron Bjelland, in       *
    his official capacity as a Lieutenant at   *
    the North Dakota State Penitentiary,       *
    *
    Appellees.
    ___________
    Submitted: April 2, 2010
    Filed: April 12, 2010
    ___________
    Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Dale J. Burke appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment
    in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We dismiss the appeal because Burke’s brief
    completely fails to meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure
    28(a). See Carter v. Lutheran Med. Ctr., 
    87 F.3d 1025
    , 1026 (8th Cir. 1996) (per
    curiam) (dismissing pro se appeal where brief presented no question for court to
    decide; among other shortfalls, brief did not provide statement of issues presented for
    review or identify any basis of alleged error by district court); Brown v. Frey, 
    806 F.2d 801
    , 804 (8th Cir. 1986) (pro se litigants are not excused from compliance with
    procedural law); cf. Puckett v. Cook, 
    864 F.2d 619
    , 620 n.2 (8th Cir. 1989) (to extent
    appellant was challenging dismissal of federal claims, he failed to show precisely and
    with reference to record why findings were clearly wrong, and this court would not
    search record for error relative to claims). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal, and
    we deny Burke’s pending motion.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, United States District Judge for the District
    of North Dakota.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-2597

Judges: Melloy, Bowman, Smith

Filed Date: 4/12/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024