Sherman Raines v. John E. Potter, No. 06-1463 (8th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - employment discrimination. Appeal dismissed as appellant's brief contains no relevant arguments and makes no reference to the district court's summary judgment ruling.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 06-1463 ___________ Sherman Raines, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, * United States Postal Service, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: January 31, 2007 Filed: February 7, 2007 ___________ Before COLLOTON, HANSEN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Sherman Raines appeals the district court s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his employment-discrimination action and moves to consolidate the appeal with Appeal No. 06-1919. Because Raines s pro se appellate brief contains no relevant argument and makes no reference to the summary judgment ruling, we grant appellee s motion to dismiss the appeal for failure to comply with federal rules of appellate procedure. See Fed. R. App. P. 28(a) (what appellant s brief must contain); 1 The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. Carter v. Lutheran Med. Ctr., 87 F.3d 1025, 1026 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (dismissing pro se appeal where appellant s brief presented no question for appeals court to decide; brief specifically provided no issues statement and did not identify any basis of alleged error by district court); Slack v. St. Louis County Gov t, 919 F.2d 98, 99-100 (8th Cir. 1990) (per curiam) (summarily dismissing appeal where appellant s brief contained no recitation of facts, did not point out basis of alleged district court error, and did not challenge district court s reasoning); Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 804 (8th Cir. 1986) (pro se litigants are not excused from compliance with procedural law). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal, and we deny Raines s motion to consolidate. ______________________________ -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.
