
    S’cie WARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KRAMER SCHOOL ART LOFT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, An Arkansas Limited Partnership; J. Scott Grummer, individually and as Executive Director of the Downtown Little Rock Community Development Corporation; Downtown Little Rock Community Development Corporation; Downtown Little Rock Redevelopment Corporation; John Shiver, individually and as Executive Director of First Capital Residential, LLC; First Capital Residential, LLC; Arkansas Development Finance Authority; All the Right Moves, Inc.; City of Little Rock, Arkansas; Paul Esterer; Todd Alan Rice; Rose Mary Epperson, Defendants-Appellees.
    
      No. 15-3113
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 7, 2016
    Filed: July 14, 2016
    S’cie Ward, Little Rock, AR, Pro Se.
    Michael W. Mitchell, Emily Sneddon, Mitchell & Blackstock, Little Rock, AR, for Defendants-Appellees Kramer School Art Loft Limited Partnership, An Arkansas Limited Partnership, J. Scott Grum-mer, individually and as Executive Director of the Downtown Little Rock Community Development Corporation, Downtown Little Rock Community Development Corporation, Downtown Little Rock Redevelopment Corporation.
    Michael McCarty Harrison, Watts <& Donovan, Michael W. Mitchell, Emily Sneddon, Mitchell & Blackstock, Little Rock, AR, John Shiver, individually and as Executive Director of First Capital Residential, LLC, First Capital Residential, LLC, Rose Mary Epperson.
    Mindy D. Pipkin, Bourgon Burnelle Reynolds, Assistant Attorney General, Little Rock, AR, for Defendant-Appellee Arkansas Development Finance Authority.
    Paul D. McNeill, RMP, LLP, Jonesboro, AR, for Defendant-Appellee All the Right Moves, Inc.
    LaTonya Laird Austin, Sherri Latimer, City Attorney’s Office, Little Rock, AR, for Defendant-Appellee City of Little Rock, Arkansas.
    Emmett B. Chiles, Thomas Hartley Wyatt, Quattlebaum & GROOMS, Little Rock, AR, for Defendants-Appellees Paul Esterer, Todd Alan Rice.
    Before SMITH, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

S’cie Ward appeals following the district court’s adverse grant of summary judgment in her action raising claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1982 and other federal statutes, as well as under state law. As to the district court’s determination that some claims against certain parties were barred because Ms. Ward had not raised them as compulsory counterclaims in a prior unlawful-detainer action against her in state court, we agree with the district court’s well-reasoned analysis of those claims. See Brown v. Louisiana-Pacific Corp., 820 F.3d 339, 344 (8th Cir. 2016) (reviewing de novo grant of summary judgment); see also Tedder v. Am. Railcar Indus., Inc., 739 F.3d 1104, 1111 (8th Cir. 2014) (remedy for ineffective assistance of counsel in civil case is suit against attorney for malpractice). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 
      
      . The Honorable James M. Moody, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
     
      
      . The grant of summary judgment on these claims is the only apparent challenge Ms. Ward raises on appeal, and thus her other claims are waived. See Hess v. Ables, 714 F.3d 1048, 1051 n.2 (8th Cir. 2013) (claim is waived where, there is no briefing on why dismissal was improper).
     