Samuel Lipari v. General Electric Company , 354 F. App'x 269 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 08-3115
    ___________
    Samuel K. Lipari, as Assignee of       *
    Dissolved Medical Supply Chain, Inc., *
    *
    Appellant,                *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                              * District Court for the
    * Western District of Missouri.
    General Electric Company; General      *
    Electric Capital Business Asset        *       [UNPUBLISHED]
    Funding Corporation; GE                *
    Transportation Systems Globaling       *
    Signaling, LLC; Stewart Foster;        *
    Jeffrey R. Immelt; Seyfarth Shaw,      *
    LLP; Heartland Financial Group,        *
    Inc.; Christopher M. McDaniel;         *
    Bradley J. Schlozman,                  *
    *
    Appellees.                *
    ___________
    Submitted: November 27, 2009
    Filed: December 4, 2009
    ___________
    Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Samuel Lipari appeals the district court’s1 orders granting defendants’ motions
    to dismiss his civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)
    claims, denying his motion to amend his complaint, and denying his post-judgment
    request for the district court judge’s recusal. Following careful review, we find no
    basis for reversal. See Charles Brooks Co. v. Georgia-Pacific, LLC, 
    552 F.3d 718
    ,
    721-23 (8th Cir. 2009) (recognizing de novo review of a dismissal and affirming the
    dismissal of one plaintiff’s individual claims because he failed to allege an injury to
    confer standing); Regions Bank v. J.R. Oil Co., 
    387 F.3d 721
    , 728-29 (8th Cir. 2004)
    (explaining, to have standing to bring a civil RICO claim, plaintiff must have suffered
    an injury “by reason of” a RICO violation and the showing of an injury requires proof
    of a concrete financial loss, and not mere injury to a valuable intangible property
    interest); see also United States ex rel. Joshi v. St. Luke’s Hosp., 
    441 F.3d 552
    , 555
    (8th Cir. 2006) (stating abuse of discretion review for denial of a motion to amend a
    complaint, but de novo review of the underlying legal conclusion that a proposed
    amendment to the complaint would have been futile); Hooker v. Story, 
    159 F.3d 1139
    ,
    1140 (8th Cir. 1998) (per curiam) (declaring the abuse of discretion standard of review
    for recusal motions).
    We affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., Chief Judge, United States District
    Court for the Western District of Missouri.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-3115

Citation Numbers: 354 F. App'x 269

Filed Date: 12/4/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023