Tynisha Reinerio v. The Bank of New York Mellon , 668 F. App'x 669 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 16-1181
    ___________________________
    Tynisha Latrice Reinerio
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
    v.
    The Bank of New York Mellon, formerly known as The Bank of New York; Bank
    of America, N.A.; Southlaw P.C.
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
    ____________
    Submitted: August 23, 2016
    Filed: August 26, 2016
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Tynisha Reinerio appeals after the district court1 dismissed her complaint. On
    appeal, she argues that the district court erred by denying her motion for remand
    because it lacked jurisdiction, by dismissing her claims, and by denying motions to
    compel discovery. Reinerio also files motions to exclude certain evidence from the
    appellate record.
    First, upon de novo review, we conclude that removal was proper. See Block
    v. Toyota Motor Corp., 
    665 F.3d 944
    , 947-48 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review;
    describing fraudulent joinder standard). Second, we find no reason to reverse the
    dismissal order, as Reinerio failed to allege sufficient facts in her amended complaint
    to state a claim. See Anderson-Tully Co. v. McDaniel, 
    571 F.3d 760
    , 762 (8th Cir.
    2009) (standard of review); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 
    556 U.S. 662
    , 678 (2009)
    (pleading that offers labels and conclusions, formulaic recitation of elements of cause
    of action, or tenders naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement does not
    suffice). Third, we conclude that the district court did not grossly abuse its discretion
    by denying Reinerio’s discovery motions. See Roberts v. Shawnee Mission Ford, Inc.
    
    352 F.3d 358
    , 360 (8th Cir. 2003) (standard of review).
    In conclusion, we deny Reinerio’s motions, see Fed. R. App. P. 10(a) (listing
    items that constitute record on appeal, including original papers and exhibits filed in
    district court), and we affirm, see 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., United States District Judge for the
    Western District of Missouri.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-1181

Citation Numbers: 668 F. App'x 669

Judges: Loken, Benton, Kelly

Filed Date: 8/26/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024