Alan R. Vaughn v. Richard Swatek, No. 06-2451 (8th Cir. 2006)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - civil rights. Defendants' summary judgment affirmed without comment; order restricting plaintiff from filing future actions without prior court approval is affirmed.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ Nos. 06-1511/2451 ___________ Alan R. Vaughn, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Richard Swatek; Curtis D. Foss; Myron * Choquette, VFW Post # 2948 * Quartermaster; Merchants Bank, N.A.; * Jennifer Hasbargen, Koochiching * County Attorney; Carol Clauson, * Koochiching County Court * Administrator; Charles H. Ledue, * Ninth Judicial District Court Judge; * Donald J. Aandal, Ninth Judicial * District Court Judge; Donna K. Dixon, * Ninth Judicial District Court Judge; * John P. Smith, Ninth Judicial District * Court Judge; Martha Grimes, * * Appellees. * Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. [UNPUBLISHED] ___________ Submitted: September 28, 2006 Filed: October 10, 2006 ___________ Before SMITH, MAGILL, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this civil rights action brought by Alan Vaughn asserting defendants violated his constitutional rights and participated in a broad conspiracy, Vaughn appeals the district court s1 adverse grant of summary judgment (No. 06-1511), and the court s subsequent order restricting Vaughn from filing future actions in the District of Minnesota without prior court approval (No. 06-2451). Following careful review, we affirm the grant of summary judgment, see Mettler v. Whitledge, 165 F.3d 1197, 1200, 1202 (8th Cir. 1999) (summary judgment standard of review), and we find no abuse of discretion in the imposition of sanctions, see In re Tyler, 839 F.2d 1290, 1290-95 (8th Cir. 1988) (per curiam) (affirming district court s decision to restrict litigant s future filings and endorsing its rationale that excessive litigation burdens court resources and defendants, who have right to be free from harassing, abusive, and meritless litigation). In both rulings, we agree with the thorough analysis provided by the magistrate judge and adopted by the district court. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ ¹The Honorable Donovan W. Frank, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Raymond L. Erickson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota. -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.
