Michael Neudecker v. Shakopee Police Dept., etc., et al, No. 08-3286 (8th Cir. 2009)

 Annotate this Case

Court Description: Civil case - civil rights. Defendant's judgment affirmed without comment; no error in denying plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel.

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 08-3286 ___________ Michael Neudecker, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Shakopee Police Department; Quality, * District of Minnesota. Lifestyles, Inc., doing business as * Friendship Manor Health Care Center; * [UNPUBLISHED] Scott County Department of Human * Services; Laurie McMillen; City * of Shakopee; County of Scott, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: October 13, 2009 Filed: December 11, 2009 ___________ Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 action, Michael Neudecker appeals the district court s1 adverse judgment based partially on a dismissal for failure to state a claim and 1 The Honorable Patrick J. Schiltz, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Jeanne J. Graham, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota. partially on summary judgment. Upon de novo review, see Schaaf v. Residential Funding Corp., 517 F.3d 544, 549 (8th Cir.) (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 222 (2008); Gordon v. Shafer Contracting Co., 469 F.3d 1191, 1194 (8th Cir. 2006) (summary judgment), we agree with the district court s disposition. In addition, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Neudecker appointed counsel, see Phillips v. Jasper County Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review; no statutory or constitutional right to appointed counsel in civil cases), and that none of the district court s other rulings constituted reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -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.