
    Paul C. STEPNES, Appellant, v. Robert J. TENNESSEN; Christine Tennessen; City of Minneapolis, Minnesota; Minneapolis Police Department (a department of the city); Mark Wisocki, Officer, in his individual and official capacities; Paul Hatle, Officer, in his individual and official capacities; Adam Chard, in his individual and official capacities; John Does, 1-4; Robert Illetschko, Officer, in his individual and official capacities, Appellees.
    No. 06-3725.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 27, 2007.
    Filed: March 6, 2008.
    Jill Clark, Golden Valley, MN, for Appellant.
    Michael R. Cunningham, Henry Wang, Gray & Plant, Cheryl Lynne Fundingsland, James A. Moore, City Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, Andrew T. Shern, Christopher G. Angelí, Murnane & Brandt, St. Paul, MN, for Appellees.
    Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Paul Stepnes appeals from the district court’s summary judgment order dismissing his civil rights and malicious prosecution claims against his neighbors Robert and Christine Tennessen, the City of Minneapolis and four Minneapolis police officers.

The facts of this case are lengthy and convoluted, stemming as they do from a backyard dispute between neighbors that escalated into threats, protection orders, arrests, physical confrontations, dog-kicking, and the like. The district court’s memorandum opinion treats the facts and the legal claims arising therefrom accurately and comprehensively. Finding no error in the district court’s ruling, and concluding that a further discussion would be of no precedential value, we affirm on the basis of the reasons set forth in the district court’s opinion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 
      
      . The Honorable Joan N. Ericksen, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.
     