Carter v. Romines, No. 77-1070
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before HEANEY, ROSS and WEBSTER; PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 560 F.2d 395 |
| Parties | Albert H. CARTER, Appellant, v. Parvin ROMINES, Marion Thomas, and Clerk of the Circuit Court of Crittenden County, Arkansas, Appellees. |
| Decision Date | 01 December 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 77-1070 |
Page 395
v.
Parvin ROMINES, Marion Thomas, and Clerk of the Circuit
Court of Crittenden County, Arkansas, Appellees.
Eighth Circuit.
Decided Aug. 19, 1977.
As Amended on Denial of Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Dec. 1, 1977.
Albert H. Carter, Corpus Christi, for appellant.
Ed W. McCorkle, Arkadelphia, Ark., filing brief for appellee, Romines.
Skillman, Durrett & Davis, West Memphis, Ark., filing brief for appellee, Thomas.
Before HEANEY, ROSS and WEBSTER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
On December 30, 1976, appellant Albert Carter filed the instant complaint in the District Court. The complaint alleged that appellees and law enforcement officers acting under their direction had violated the civil rights of one Robert Lee Swanson by wrongfully withholding certain moneys and other personalty taken from Swanson subsequent to his arrest in August, 1968. Appellant further alleged that Swanson had assigned his entire interest in the cause of action to appellant. Jurisdiction was based on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332, and 1343(3).
The District Court, sua sponte, dismissed the complaint. The court concluded that appellant was not a proper party in interest and lacked standing to assert Swanson's rights and that the underlying cause of action was barred by the statute of limitations. We affirm the District Court on the basis that appellant lacks standing.
Ordinarily, a party has no standing to assert the rights of third persons. See, e. g., Singleton v. Wulff, 428 U.S. 106, 114, 96 S.Ct. 2868, 49 L.Ed.2d 826 (1976); McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 429, 81 S.Ct. 1101, 6 L.Ed.2d 393 (1961); United States v. Raines, 362 U.S. 17, 22, 80 S.Ct. 519, 4 L.Ed.2d 524 (1960); Regents of University of Minnesota v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, 560 F.2d 352 at 364 (8th Cir. 1977); Shaw v. Garrison, 545 F.2d 980, 983 n.4 (5th Cir. 1977); Tyler v. Ryan, 419 F.Supp. 905, 906 (E.D.Mo.1976); Javits v.
Page 396
Stevens, 382 F.Supp. 131, 135 (S.D.N.Y.1974).This general rule, like all rules, is subject to certain narrow exceptions. None of these exceptions, however, apply here. 1 The case before us is not one where the aggrieved party could not be represented in the context of the dispute before the court, Barrows v. Jackson, 346 U.S. 249, 73 S.Ct. 1031, 97 L.Ed. 1586 (1953), where a property deprivation was the indirect result of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carter v. Telectron, Inc., Civ. A. No. 71-H-944.
...assert civil Thomas, & Clerk of the pltf. for violation of rights of third person; Circuit Court of civil rights of Robert 8-19-77: Aff'd, 560 F.2d 395 (8th Crittenden County, Ark. Lee Swanson by withholding Cir. 1977) (per curiam); of certain personalty 12-1-77: Rehearing denied taken in c......
-
People of the State of Colo. v. Carter, Civ. A. No. 86 F 204.
...at least two cases as an assignee of alleged civil rights violations which were dismissed on the same grounds. See Carter v. Romines, 560 F.2d 395 (8th Cir.1977); Carter v. Lynn, No. H 77 259, In 1985, Mr. Carter filed Carter v. Levergne Marshall, 85 F 2325, in which Mr. Carter sought, amon......
-
Miner v. Brackney, 82-2267
...Miner has no standing to assert. Singleton v. Wulff, 428 U.S. 106, 114, 96 S.Ct. 2868, 2874, 49 L.Ed.2d 826 (1976); Carter v. Romines, 560 F.2d 395 (8th Cir.1977) (per curiam) cert. denied, 436 U.S. 948, 98 S.Ct. 2854, 56 L.Ed.2d 791 (1978); Tyler v. Ryan, 419 F.Supp. 905, 906 (E.D.Mo.1976)......
-
In re Preston Trucking Co., Inc., Bankruptcy No. 99-59994-JS.
...out, however, the Eight Circuit has held that civil rights claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 are not assignable. Carter v. Romines, 560 F.2d 395, 396 n. 1 (8th Cir. The Teamsters put forth a number of policy reasons why both WARN Act claims and claims under § 301 of the LMRA, like civil......
-
Carter v. Telectron, Inc., Civ. A. No. 71-H-944.
...assert civil Thomas, & Clerk of the pltf. for violation of rights of third person; Circuit Court of civil rights of Robert 8-19-77: Aff'd, 560 F.2d 395 (8th Crittenden County, Ark. Lee Swanson by withholding Cir. 1977) (per curiam); of certain personalty 12-1-77: Rehearing denied taken in c......
-
People of the State of Colo. v. Carter, Civ. A. No. 86 F 204.
...at least two cases as an assignee of alleged civil rights violations which were dismissed on the same grounds. See Carter v. Romines, 560 F.2d 395 (8th Cir.1977); Carter v. Lynn, No. H 77 259, In 1985, Mr. Carter filed Carter v. Levergne Marshall, 85 F 2325, in which Mr. Carter sought, amon......
-
Miner v. Brackney, 82-2267
...Miner has no standing to assert. Singleton v. Wulff, 428 U.S. 106, 114, 96 S.Ct. 2868, 2874, 49 L.Ed.2d 826 (1976); Carter v. Romines, 560 F.2d 395 (8th Cir.1977) (per curiam) cert. denied, 436 U.S. 948, 98 S.Ct. 2854, 56 L.Ed.2d 791 (1978); Tyler v. Ryan, 419 F.Supp. 905, 906 (E.D.Mo.1976)......
-
In re Preston Trucking Co., Inc., Bankruptcy No. 99-59994-JS.
...out, however, the Eight Circuit has held that civil rights claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 are not assignable. Carter v. Romines, 560 F.2d 395, 396 n. 1 (8th Cir. The Teamsters put forth a number of policy reasons why both WARN Act claims and claims under § 301 of the LMRA, like civil......