John Buckley v. Regina Dowdle, et al, No. 08-1005 (8th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. Plaintiff cannot bring a claim under the Act on behalf of his minor child, and his own claims were meritless; dismissal of claims on behalf of daughter modified to be without prejudice.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 08-1005 ___________ John Buckley, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Regina Dowdle, Family Service * Eastern District of Arkansas. Worker, Arkansas Department of * Health and Human Services; Michael * [UNPUBLISHED] E. Sanders, Attorney; Charles A. * Yeargan, Judge, Pike County; * Elizabeth Harvey, Mother of minor * child, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: March 18, 2009 Filed: March 24, 2009 ___________ Before BYE, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. John Buckley filed a pro se civil complaint on behalf of himself and his minor child, alleging violations of the United States Constitution and the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA). The district court1 dismissed the complaint, and Buckley appeals. After careful de novo review, we affirm. Buckley cannot bring a claim on behalf of his minor daughter, see Myers v. Loudoun County Pub. Sch., 418 F.3d 395, 401 (4th Cir. 2005), and his own claims are meritless. He did not explain how defendants violated CAPTA, see Hutchinson ex rel. Baker v. Spink, 126 F.3d 895, 901-02 (7th Cir. 1997); two defendants are not state actors for purposes of a 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 suit for violation of Buckley s constitutional rights, see Crumpley-Patterson v. Trinity Lutheran Hosp., 388 F.3d 588, 590 (8th Cir. 2004); the state judge enjoys judicial immunity, see Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12 (1991) (per curiam); and Buckley did not explain how the remaining state actor violated his constitutional rights, see Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004) (pro se complaints must allege sufficient facts).2 Accordingly, we affirm, but we modify the dismissal of all claims on behalf of Buckley s minor daughter to be without prejudice. We also deny the pending motion to submit exhibits. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. 2 Although the district court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, we prefer to reach the merits in light of Buckley s assertion of constitutional claims. See Phipps v. FDIC, 417 F.3d 1006, 1010 (8th Cir. 2005) (court may affirm on any basis supported by record). -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.
