Virginia A. Hayes v. City of Omaha
Opinion
Virginia A. Hayes appeals from the district court’s 1 dismissal without prejudice *684 of her civil action against numerous defendants. Following our de novo review, and liberally construing Ms. Hayes’s pleadings, we conclude she has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted in federal court. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6); Haines v. Kemer, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972) (per curiam); Hanten v. Sch. Dist. of Riverview Gardens, 183 F.3d 799, 805 (8th Cir. 1999). We also conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Ms. Hayes’s complaint for her noncompliance with pleading requirements. See Fed. R.Civ.P. 8(a); Atkins v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 967 F.2d 1197, 1203 (8th Cir. 1992).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable David L. Piester, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Nebraska.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Virginia A. HAYES, Appellant, v. CITY OF OMAHA; Paul Kratz; David Smalheiser; Rich Cerveny; Par 3; Dean Jenson; Clark Jenson; American Family Insurance; Gale McKenna; Buster Brown, City Clerk; Joe Mangiamelli, Major’s Assistant; Omaha Police Department; L. Schenkelberg; Tony Costa, Contract Compliance Office, Human Relations Department; Larry Foster, Director, Parks and Recreation Department (Forestry); Rita Vlademar, Contract Compliance Officer, Human Relations Department, Appellees
- Status
- Unpublished