OPINIONS ARE POSTED DAILY BETWEEN 10:15 and 11:00 a.m.
Today is:  [ Friday July 04, 2008 ]  - - - - -  NO OPINIONS HAVE BEEN POSTED TODAY  
The most recent opinions are for:  [ 07/03/2008 ]   

DISCLAIMER:  The following unofficial case summaries are prepared by the clerk's office
                           as a courtesy to the reader.  They are not part of the opinion of the court.

062059P.pdf   07/03/2008  USA  v.  Kendrix D. Feemster
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  06-2059
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Beam and Smith, Circuit Judges]
   Criminal case - Sentencing. On remand from the Supreme Court of the
   United States for further consideration under Gall. The district court
   committed procedural error and abused its discretion in sentencing
   defendant to 120 months because, in attempting to explain its reasons for
   varying downward 240 months from the bottom of the applicable
   Guidelines range, the court gave significant weight to irrelevant factors
   (defendant's age, the absence of a weapon in his prior crimes and his
   completion of probation) and failed to support the extent of its variance
   with sufficient justifications.
  
063321P.pdf   07/03/2008  Nasri G. Al Yatim  v.  Peter D. Keisler
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  06-3321
                          and No:  07-1456
   Board of Immigration Appeals   
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Melloy and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
   Petition for Review - Immigration. Petitioners, Palestinian Christians,
   failed to show that they were likely to experience either persecution or
   torture if they returned to Palestine; BIA did not abuse its discretion in
   denying petitioners' motion to reopen, which was based on a claim
   of changed country conditions as a result of the election of Hamas to
   control of the Palestinian Authority.
  
071811P.pdf   07/03/2008  United States  v.  James Anderson
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  07-1811
                          and No:  07-2037
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul   
   [PUBLISHED] [Jarvey, Author, with Loken, Chief Judge, and Murphy,
   Circuit Judge]
   Criminal case - Criminal law and Sentencing. Evidence was sufficient
   to support conviction for insider trading; the instructions given by the
   district court properly covered defendant's theory of the case, and he was
   not entitled to his own proposed "good-faith" instruction; district court
   did not err in admitting evidence of company's policy regarding insider
   trading as it was probative of defendant's knowledge of insider-trading
   laws and his intent to defraud; court thoroughly considered the
   Guidelines and the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2553(a) and did not
   abuse its discretion in imposing a 30 month sentence.
  
071816U.pdf   07/03/2008  Butler Manufacturing Company  v.  Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texa
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  07-1816
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City   
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Bye, Arnold and Melloy, Circuit Judges]
   Civil case. Summary judgment determining responsibility for medical
   expenses affirmed without comment.
  
072267P.pdf   07/03/2008  Margaret Sherman  v.  Winco Fireworks
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  07-2267
                          and No:  07-2393
   District of Nebraska - Omaha   
   [PUBLISHED] [Hansen, Author, with Wollman and Melloy, Circuit Judges]
   Civil case - torts. Because defendant's motion to amend its answer to
   assert a preemption defense was filed more than 17 months after the
   established scheduling deadline for amending pleadings, the district court
   was required to apply Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)'s good-cause standard in
   ruling on the motion; here, the district court did not effectively engage in
   a good-cause analysis, and the court abused its discretion in allowing the
   amendment; the error was not harmless as it significantly affected
   plaintiffs' failure-to-warn and consortium claims, and the court's
   summary judgment order on those claims is reversed; challenges to jury
   instructions rejected; that portion of the defendant's attorneys' fees award
   related to the reversed counts is set aside, and that portion which is
   related to the jury-tried issues is affirmed.
  
072535P.pdf   07/03/2008  Edward Kountze  v.  Tyler Gaines
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  07-2535
   District of Nebraska - Omaha   
   [PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Loken, Chief Judge, and Wollman,
   Circuit Judge]
   Civil case. District court did not err in finding that plaintiff was not a
   member of the board at the time he filed this derivative action and that he
   lacked capacity under Nebraska law to bring the action; district court did
   not abuse its discretion in imposing sanctions against plaintiff on the
   ground he included a defendant for improper purpose, knowing that the
   claims against it were barred by a prior dismissal.
  
072784P.pdf   07/03/2008  BNSF Railway Company  v.  Lori Swanson
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  07-2784
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Beam, Author, with Wollman and Riley, Circuit Judges]
   Civil case - Federal Railroad Safety Act. Provisions of Minnesota
   Statute Sections 609.849(a)(1) and (a)(2), governing a railroad's
   treatment of injured workers, are both preempted by the Internal Control
   Plans regulations adopted by the Federal Railroad Administration
   pursuant to the Federal Railroad Safety Act, and the district court erred in
   finding that only (a)(2) was preempted; case reversed and remanded.
  
072884P.pdf   07/03/2008  City of Springfield  v.  Cingular Wireless
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  07-2884
                          and No:  07-2885
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City   
   [PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Hansen and Melloy, Circuit Judges]
   Civil case - State tax law. District court had subject matter jurisdiction
   to consider declaratory judgment action brought by the City of
   Springfield, Missouri, in which it asked the court to consider the question
   of whether companies providing cell phone services in the City are
   subject to a tax ordinance covering businesses supplying phones and
   telephonic services with the city; cell phones are telephones and cell
   services are telephonic services for the purposes of Springfield's tax
   ordinance.
  
073017P.pdf   07/03/2008  Cheryl Followell  v.  United States
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  07-3017
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock   
   [PUBLISHED] [Bye, Author, with Loken, Chief Judge, and Beam, Circuit Judge]
   Civil case. Dismissal of action affirmed without comment.
  
073403P.pdf   07/03/2008  United States  v.  Bryan Dodds
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  07-3403
   District of Nebraska - Lincoln   
   [PUBLISHED] [Criminal case - Sentencing. District court carefully
   considered the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3553(a), and defendant's
   sentence was not unreasonable; assuming, without deciding that the
   government misrepresented defendant's relevant conduct at sentencing,
   there is no evidence that the court considered those statements, and they
   are not grounds for resentencing.
  
081187P.pdf   07/03/2008  United States  v.  Timothy Morriss
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  08-1187
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - St. Joseph   
   [PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Beam and Benton, Circuit Judges]
   Criminal case - criminal law. District court did not err in finding that
   defendant's right to counsel had not attached at the time of an interview
   by FBI; government's conduct was not fundamentally unfair and did not
   violated defendant's due process rights.