RIDDLE v. Federal Reserve Bank, of Kansas City Defendant (2019)

[Unpublished]

Nebraska residents Justin and Erin Riddle appeal following the district court’s ¹ adverse grant of summary judgment in their pro se civil action. For reversal, they challenge the district court’s dismissal of their claim seeking relief under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). They also argue that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on their claim for tortious interference with a business relationship.

After careful review, we agree with the district court that the Riddles failed to state a claim under the FCRA. See Kelly v. City of Omaha, 813 F.3d 1070, 1075 (8th Cir. 2016) (grant of Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion is reviewed de novo). Further, we conclude that summary judgment was proper on the tortious interference claim. See Tusing v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 639 F.3d 507, 514 (8th Cir. 2011) (summary judgment decision is reviewed de novo, viewing record in light most favorable to non-moving party); see also Pettit v. Paxton, 255 Neb. 279, 583 N.W.2d 604, 609-11 (1998) (discussing requirements of tortious interference claim under Nebraska law). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable John M. Gerrard, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.

PER CURIAM.