Bennett-Charles Formanack v. Stillwater Towing Inc.
Bennett-Charles Formanack v. Stillwater Towing Inc.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________
No. 18-1344 ___________________________
Bennett-Charles Formanack
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Stillwater Towing Inc.; Richard J. Ritzer; Michelle Ritzer; Kevin Last Name Unknown
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________
Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis ____________
Submitted: October 17, 2018 Filed: October 24, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________
Before LOKEN, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________
PER CURIAM.
In this diversity action, Bennett-Charles Formanack seeks to appeal after the district court1 dismissed his complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and
1 The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. denied his postjudgment motions. After careful review, we dismiss the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction, because Formanack’s notice of appeal did not designate the order, judgment, or part thereof that he was appealing. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B) (notice of appeal must designate judgment, order, or part thereof being appealed); Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248 (1992) (Rule 3 requirements are jurisdictional). We also deny as moot Formanack’s pending motion to suppress. ______________________________
-2-
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished