8th Cir.

Fedynich v. Stalkfleet

June 2, 2026 ·25-2249 ·Panel Decision · By Aisha Johnson

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed a district court's grant of summary judgment in a pro se housing discrimination case. The appellate court found no error in the lower court's determination that the plaintiffs failed to establish the necessary elements for their claims under the Fair Housing Act and the Rehabilitation Act.

Background

Elizabeth and Nicole Fedynich filed a pro se action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa alleging disability discrimination under the Fair Housing Act and the Rehabilitation Act, as well as retaliation under the Fair Housing Act. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The Fedynichs appealed the decision.

The court’s reasoning

Upon de novo review, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the grant of summary judgment. The court noted that summary judgment was proper on Rehabilitation Act claims because the plaintiff did not establish an impairment that substantially limited any major life activities. Regarding Fair Housing Act claims, the court reiterated that disability is one of several elements plaintiffs must establish to recover. The appellate court also found no abuse of discretion in the district court’s rulings on pretrial matters, dismissal without prejudice, and appointment of counsel. The court declined to review the magistrate judge’s non-dispositive motions that were not appealed to the district court and found no merit in allegations of judicial bias.

What it means going forward

The decision reinforces the requirement for plaintiffs in disability discrimination cases to provide evidence of a substantial limitation on major life activities to survive summary judgment. It also clarifies the scope of appellate review regarding non-dispositive motions and judicial bias allegations in pro se housing cases.