Bruce Danielson v. Mike Huether, No. 21-1556 (8th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Shepherd, and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil rights. The order granting defendants summary judgment is affirmed without comment.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-1556 ___________________________ Bruce Danielson lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Mike Huether; David A. Pfeifle; Marty Jackley; Heather Hitterdal; City of Sioux Falls; State of South Dakota; John Doe lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of South Dakota - Southern ____________ Submitted: January 25, 2022 Filed: January 28, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Bruce Danielson appeals following the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his pro se civil rights action. After careful review of the record below, the parties’ submissions on appeal, and the issues properly before us, we find no basis for reversal. We conclude the district court properly granted summary judgment. See Morris v. Cradduck, 954 F.3d 1055, 1058 (8th Cir. 2020) (reviewing grant of summary judgment de novo, viewing evidence and drawing all reasonable inferences in light most favorable to non-movant). Further, the district court did not err in declining Danielson’s request to strike portions of the summary judgment record. See Gallagher v. Magner, 619 F.3d 823, 844 (8th Cir. 2010) (discussing the standard of review). Finally, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Danielson’s post-judgment motion. See United States v. Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist., 440 F.3d 930, 933 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Roberto Lange, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of South Dakota. -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.
