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.
161256P.pdf   06/21/2017  Luis Mendoza-Saenz  v.  Jefferson B. Sessions, III
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-1256
   Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals   
[PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. Petitioner's probation, community service and fines constituted court-imposed penalties under 8 U.S.C. Section 1101(a)(48), and the BIA did not err in affirming the IJ's finding that petitioner has a conviction for aggravated forgery, a crime involving moral turpitude, and that he was ineligible for cancellation of removal. 161914P.pdf 06/21/2017 United States v. George Thunderhawk U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 16-1914 U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - Bismarck
[PUBLISHED] Loken, Author, with Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Restitution. For the court's prior opinion in the matter, see United States v. Thunderhawk, 799 F.3d 1203 (8th Cir. 2015). The district court gave defendant notice at sentencing that restitution would be ordered and scheduled a hearing regarding the amount; the court stayed the hearing pending final resolution of defendant's appeal, and then issued a restitution order after this court issued its mandate; where defendant had notice that restitution would be required and the delay did not prejudice him, the restitution order was not an abuse of the district court's discretion; the evidence was sufficient to show that defendant's actions were the proximate cause of defendant's medical costs; the district court did not err in directing defendant and the Probation Office to develop a suitable schedule of payments when he is released; this order is not an improper delegation of judicial authority because the plan will be subject to judicial review and approval. 162195U.pdf 06/21/2017 Robert Brown v. Virgil Griffin U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 16-2195 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Jonesboro
[UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Benton, Bowman and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Appellate Procedure. The order appealed from did not dispose of all defendants and the appeal was, therefore, premature; defendant failed to file a new notice of appeal after the entry of judgment disposing of the claims, and his premature appeal is not saved by FRAP 4(a)(2); dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 162282U.pdf 06/21/2017 Nicholas Dereschuk v. Nancy A. Berryhill U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 16-2282 U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
[UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Murphy and Benton, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Social Security. The ALJ's determination that claimant retained the Residual Functional Capacity to perform sedentary work, with certain limitations, was supported by substantial evidence and the denial of benefits is affirmed without further comment. 162818P.pdf 06/21/2017 Timothy Gilkerson v. Nebraska Colocation Centers U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 16-2818 U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
[PUBLISHED] [Beam, Author, with Benton and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Contracts. Applying Nebraska's two-part test for determining whether a contract was voidable as the product of duress, the district court erred in granting the employer summary judgment based on a finding that the mutual rescission and term sheet plaintiff signed was not unjust and voidable as a product of duress given the alleged pressure brought to bear on plaintiff to sign the mutual rescission and term sheet; in light of this finding the question of whether the threat of termination would support a claim of duress is remanded for further proceedings; given the court has held that summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for breach of contract was improper, the dismissal of plaintiff's Wage Payment and Collection Act claim was also improper. 163214U.pdf 06/21/2017 Iris Jaibal-Ayala v. Jefferson B. Sessions, III U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 16-3214 Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
[UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Arnold and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. The IJ and BIA did not err in finding that petitioner failed to establish past persecution; the threats to her family, while disturbing, were never fulfilled and were not so menacing as to, without more, constitute past persecution. 163331U.pdf 06/21/2017 United States v. Craig Burns U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 16-3331 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Dubuque
[UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Colloton, Beam and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. District court adequately considered the 3553(a) factors and provided an adequate explanation for its sentencing decision; imposition of a sentence within the recommended guidelines range was not substantively unreasonable. 163415U.pdf 06/21/2017 NLRB v. EYM King of Missouri, LLC U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 16-3415 National Labor Relations Board
[UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Gruender, Murphy and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Petition for Enforcement - National Labor Relations Board. Substantial evidence supported the Board's determination that EYM refused to hire an applicant because of his participation in protected labor activities, in violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act. 163433P.pdf 06/21/2017 North Memorial Health Care v. National Labor Relations Board U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 16-3433 and No: 16-3657 National Labor Relations Board
[PUBLISHED] [Murphy, Author, with Benton and Beam, Circuit Judge] Petition for Review - National Labor Relations Board. The Board's determination that the employer violated Section 8(a)(1) by interfering with nonemployee union representatives' use of the hospital cafeteria on three separate dates is affirmed; substantial evidence supported the Board's determination that the hospital had a past practice of allowing nonemployee union representatives to use the cafeteria so long as their conduct did not rise to the level of a meeting, and the evidence supported the Board's determination that the hospital unilaterally changed its past practices when it interfered with cafeteria access by nonunion representatives; the petition for review of the Board's finding that the unilateral change in access violated Section 8(a)(5) is denied; the hospital's surveillance of two nonunion representative violated Section 8(a)(1); substantial evidence supports the Board's determination that the hospital violated the National Labor Relations Act by prohibiting its employee from wearing union insignia in the hospital's atrium on a day of informational picketing; the Board erred, though, in determining that this protection extended to a nonemployees wearing the insignia and the hospital did not violate the Act when it prohibited two nonemployees from wearing the union insignia on its premises. Judge Beam, dissenting. 163840U.pdf 06/21/2017 United States v. Tiffany Zerley U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 16-3840 U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
[UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Benton, Bowman and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable.