From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kohser v. Merth

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Oct 11, 2007
250 F. App'x 753 (8th Cir. 2007)

Summary

finding that Plaintiff's claim of inadequate access to the courts failed as a matter of law

Summary of this case from Kohser v. Roehrich

Opinion

No. 06-1736.

Submitted: September 24, 2007.

Filed: October 11, 2007.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.

Scott Andrew Kohser, Faribault, MN, pro se.

Jennifer A. Service, Attorney General's Office, St. Paul, MN, for Appellees.

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.


[UNPUBLISHED]


Minnesota prisoner Scott Andrew Kohser appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action.

The Honorable Joan N. Ericksen, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Susan Richard Nelson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

Upon de novo review, see Entzi v. Redmann, 485 F.3d 998, 1001 (8th Cir. 2007), we affirm. We agree with the district court that Kohser's legal mail, access to courts, Fifth Amendment, due process, and retaliation claims failed on their merits. See McKune v. Lile, 536 U.S. 24, 35-36, 122 S.Ct. 2017, 153 L.Ed.2d 47 (2002) (Fifth Amendment); Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484, 115 S.Ct. 2293, 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995) (due process); Entzi, 485 F.3d at 1005 (court access); Gardner v. Howard, 109 F.3d 427, 430-31 (8th Cir. 1997) (legal mail); Cornell v. Woods, 69 F.3d 1383, 1387-89 (8th Cir. 1995) (retaliation). Further, we conclude that summary judgment was not prematurely granted, see Robinson v. Terex Corp., 439 F.3d 465, 467 (8th Cir. 2006); and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing individual-capacity claims against defendants Ben Brieschke and Jeffery Shorba, and in denying Kohser's motion for a default judgment against these defendants, see Harris v. St. Louis Police Dep't, 164 F.3d 1085, 1086 (8th Cir. 1998) (per curiam); Bullock v. United States, 160 F.3d 441, 442 (8th Cir. 1998) (per curiam).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We grant Kohser's motions on appeal for verification and to file a Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(j) letter and a supplemental appendix.


Summaries of

Kohser v. Merth

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Oct 11, 2007
250 F. App'x 753 (8th Cir. 2007)

finding that Plaintiff's claim of inadequate access to the courts failed as a matter of law

Summary of this case from Kohser v. Roehrich
Case details for

Kohser v. Merth

Case Details

Full title:Scott Andrew KOHSER, Appellant, v. Laurie MERTH; Launie Zaffke; Robert…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Oct 11, 2007

Citations

250 F. App'x 753 (8th Cir. 2007)

Citing Cases

Kohser v. Roehrich

Finally, Petitioner has not shown "that he suffered an actual injury or prejudice as a result of the alleged…

Kohser v. Merth

Scott Andrew KOHSER, petitioner, v. Laurie MERTH, et al.Case below, 250 Fed.Appx. 753. Petition for writ of…