Frederick Keiser, Jr. v. Christopher Johnson, et al, No. 07-2444 (8th Cir. 2008)

 Annotate this Case

Court Description: Civil case - RICO. Dismissal of complaint against the U.S. Attorney and Keiser's former criminal defense attorneys affirmed.

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 07-2444 ___________ Frederick W. Keiser, Jr., * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the District * of North Dakota. Christopher Johnson; Jasmine H. * Dzhanszyan; Law Firm of Criminal * [UNPUBLISHED] Defense Associates; Drew H. Wrigley, * United States Attorney, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: June 23, 2008 Filed: July 10, 2008 ___________ Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Frederick W. Keiser, Jr., appeals the district court s1 dismissal of his complaint against his former criminal defense attorneys and the United States Attorney for the District of North Dakota, in which Keiser sought damages for violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. ยงยง 1961-1968, state 1 The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota. law fraud, and attorney discipline, and requested a writ of mandamus to compel the United States Attorney to bring a criminal prosecution. After carefully reviewing the record and Keiser s arguments on appeal, we find no basis for reversal. See Benton v. Merrill Lynch & Co., 524 F.3d 866, 870 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. We also grant the motion to strike the documents in Keiser s addendum and appendix that were not contained in the record below, and we deny Keiser s request to supplement the record. See Dakota Indus., Inc. v. Dakota Sportswear, Inc., 988 F.2d 61, 63 (8th Cir. 1993) (appellate court generally cannot consider evidence not contained in record below). ______________________________ -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.