Case Explained: Tricia Marie Myers v. Itasca County HRA; Diane Larson; Carrie Schmitz; Kenda Roddenberg

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-24 The eighth-circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in Tricia Myers’ pro se civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court held that the district court properly relied on a declaration submitted by defendant Diane Larson, finding it satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c)(4) because it was based on personal knowledge, set out admissible facts, and demonstrated the affiant’s competence to testify. Applying the standard of review for summary judgment as outlined in *Lloyd v. FedLoan Servicing*, the court concluded that no genuine issue of material fact existed and that the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The practical consequence is that the district court’s adverse ruling stands, resulting in a dismissal of Myers’ claims against Itasca County HRA, Diane Larson, Carrie Schmitz, and Kenda Roddenberg without further proceedings on the merits. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.