Ringsred v. City of Duluth
Eric RINGSRED, an individual and a state, federal and local taxpayer State of Minnesota by Eric Ringsred Deborah Ringsred, an individual v. CITY OF DULUTH, a municipal corporation, and the following City Officials, individually and in their official capacities Gary L. Doty, Mayor Cynthia Albright, Assistant City Attorney Bryan Brown, City Attorney Robert Asleson, Assistant City Attorney John Schweiger, Special Projects Manager John Smedberg, Assistant City Attorney Duluth Economic Development Authority Cynthia Albright, individually and in her official capacity as Director of the Duluth Economic Development Authority Team Duluth Soft Center-Duluth, Inc. Michael McNamara Duluth Area Chamber of Commerce David Ross, CEO of the Duluth Area Chamber of Commerce
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PER CURIAM.
Eric and Deborah Ringsred appeal the district court’s 1 dismissal of their lawsuit— purportedly brought on behalf of the State of Minnesota as well as themselves— against the City of Duluth and its mayor, various City agencies and employees, Soft Center-Duluth, Inc. and its director, and the Duluth Area Chamber of Commerce and related individuals and entities.
*481 After carefully reviewing the record, we affirm the dismissal of the federal claims with prejudice and the dismissal of any state claims without prejudice. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, 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.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(denying motion for Rule 11 sanctions where the arguments “besp[oke] of semantics, and not of untruths”)
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.