Andrew Riggle v. American Enterprise Property, No. 16-3196 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Gruender, Arnold and Benton, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Americans with Disabilities Act. Dismissal modified to be without prejudice. [ April 13, 2017
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-3196 ___________________________ Andrew Riggle lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Valero; American Enterprise Property; Does 1-5 lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha ____________ Submitted: April 11, 2017 Filed: April 14, 2017 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, ARNOLD, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Andrew Riggle appeals the district court’s1 dismissal with prejudice, for lack of standing, of his complaint under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 1 The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. § 12101 (ADA). Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms, but modifies the dismissal to be without prejudice. See Cty. of Mille Lacs v. Benjamin, 361 F.3d 460, 464-65 (8th Cir. 2004) (modifying judgment to be without prejudice because dismissal for lack of jurisdiction was not adjudication on merits). This court agrees that Riggle lacked standing to bring an ADA claim because he did not show how the challenged conduct injured him personally, based on his alleged disability. See Steger v. Franco, Inc., 228 F.3d 889, 892 (8th Cir. 2000) (Article III standing requires plaintiff to show (1) injury-in-fact, (2) causal relationship between injury and challenged conduct, and (3) that injury likely would be redressed by favorable decision; injury-in-fact is harm that is concrete and particularized, or actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical). The judgment is affirmed, but the dismissal is modified to be without prejudice. 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.
