Elizabeth Fedynich v. Sam Stalkfleet

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 25-2249 ___________________________ Elizabeth Fedynich; Nicole Fedynich lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellants v. Sam Stalkfleet; Trinatee Morrow lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees Drew Manager lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant Nest Property Management Group LLC; Malory Apartments; 12th Ave SW Nest Property Owner lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids ____________ Submitted: May 28, 2026 Filed: June 2, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, KELLY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM.

Elizabeth and Nicole Fedynich appeal following the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in their pro se action alleging disability discrimination under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Rehabilitation Act (RA), and retaliation under the FHA. Upon de novo review, we affirm the grant of summary judgment for the reasons stated by the district court. See 42 U.S.C. § 3617 (FHA retaliation); Trambly v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. of Neb., 145 F.4th 922, 926 (8th Cir. 2025) (standard of review; summary judgment was proper on RA claims because plaintiff did not establish he had impairment that substantially limited any major life activities); One Love Hous., LLC v. City of Anoka, 93 F.4th 424, 430 (8th Cir. 2024) (disability is one of several elements plaintiffs must establish to recover under FHA).

We find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s rulings regarding pretrial matters, dismissal without prejudice, and appointment of counsel. See Graham v. Mentor Worldwide LLC, 998 F.3d 800, 804-05 (8th Cir. 2021) (voluntary dismissal); Patterson v. Kelley, 902 F.3d 845, 849-50 (8th Cir. 2018) (appointment of counsel); Soliman v. Johanns, 412 F.3d 920, 921-22 (8th Cir. 2005) (standard of review; pro se litigants must comply with court rules). We cannot review the magistrate judge’s rulings on the Fedynichs’ many non-dispositive motions that were not appealed to the district court, see McDonald v. City of Saint Paul, 679 F.3d 698, 709 (8th Cir. 2012); and we find no merit to their allegations of judicial bias based on the court’s rulings, see Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994).

The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We grant appellants’ motion, and seal the brief and reply brief; and deny appellees’ motion to strike. ______________________________

The Honorable Leonard T. Strand, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. -2-