PHOX v. VIRTUOSO SOURCING GROUP LLC (2018)

[Unpublished]

LaRonda Phox appeals after the district court ¹ entered an order imposing restrictions on future filings, and entered an order dismissing her complaint without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

We conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing Phox’s complaint. See Plymouth Cty. v. Merscorp, Inc., 774 F.3d 1155, 1158 (8th Cir. 2014) (reviewing Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) dismissal de novo); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (requiring plaintiff’s complaint to contain sufficient factual matter to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face); Dunham v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 663 F.3d 997, 1001 (8th Cir. 2011) (discussing Fair Debt Collection Practices Act); Poehl v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 528 F.3d 1093, 1096 (8th Cir. 2008) (discussing Fair Credit Reporting Act).

Given Phox’s history of filing frivolous lawsuits, we also find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s imposition of the filing restrictions. See In re Tyler, 839 F.2d 1290, 1290-95 (8th Cir. 1988) (per curiam) (noting that courts have discretion to place reasonable restrictions on litigant who abuses judicial process); see also Peck v. Hoff, 660 F.2d 371, 374 (8th Cir. 1981) (per curiam) (reviewing filing restriction for abuse of discretion).

Accordingly, we affirm the order dismissing Phox’s complaint, and we affirm the order imposing filing restrictions.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable Greg Kays, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.

PER CURIAM.