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.
132195P.pdf   05/27/2015  United States  v.  Mahamud Said Omar
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-2195
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul    
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Murphy and Smith, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. Because the witnesses who were already 
   familiar with defendant were asked an open-ended question about whether 
   they knew him, the identification technique uses here did not create a 
   substantial likelihood of misidentification, and the district court did 
   not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress the witnesses' 
   identifications of him at trial; the district court did not err in 
   determining not to disclose FISA materials to defendant and not to 
   suppress the FISA-derived evidence that was admitted at trial; no error in 
   admitting testimony from the government's expert witness on terrorism on 
   the links between al Shabaab and other terror groups and global jihad, as 
   the evidence was relevant and its probative value was not outweighed by 
   the danger of unfair prejudice. 
141891P.pdf   05/27/2015  Louis Edwards  v.  Joseph Beck
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1891
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock    
   [PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Smith, Benton and Shepherd, Circuit 
   Civil case - Arkansas Human Heartbeat Protection Act. By banning abortions 
   after 12 weeks' gestation, the Act prohibits women from making the 
   ultimate decision to terminate a pregnancy before viability, and the 
   district court's summary judgment order permanently enjoining sections 
   20-16-1303(d)(3) and 20-16-1304 is affirmed; this case underscores the 
   importance of the parties, particularly the state, developing the record 
   in a meaningful way so as to present a real opportunity for the court to 
   examine viability, case by case, as viability steadily moves back towards 
142078P.pdf   05/27/2015  Patrick Lynch  v.  National Prescription Admin.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-2078
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Smith and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Civil procedure. The plaintiff health funds were not parties 
   to a suit between the Attorney General of the State of New York and 
   defendant ESI, and the plaintiffs' action is not barred by the doctrine of 
   res judicata since there is no privity between the Funds and the Attorney 
142230P.pdf   05/27/2015  Kathleen J. Papesh  v.  Carolyn W. Colvin
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-2230
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Bye and Beam, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Social Security. Substantial evidence on the record as a 
   whole supports a finding that the claimant was only capable of sedentary 
   work, and the ALJ's determination that claimant could perform light work 
   was outside the available zone of choice; the court declines to order the 
   Commissioner to pay benefits and remands the matter for further 
142498P.pdf   05/27/2015  Lowell Burris  v.  Gulf Underwriters Ins. Co.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-2498
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Beam, Author, with Wollman and Loken, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Insurance. For the court's prior opinion in the matter, see 
   Gulf v. Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Burris, 674 F.3d 999 (8th Cir. 2012). In 
   an action seeking coverage where the issue was whether the insurer 
   received the notice of the claim on a timely basis, plaintiff was not 
   entitled to a spoilation instruction based on defendant's destruction of 
   certain files as the evidence was insufficient to show the evidence was 
   destroyed to suppress the truth concerning plaintiff's claim; in any 
   event, defendant had no involvement in the destruction of the documents 
   and did not have any access or control over the destroyed files; evidence 
   concerning disciplinary proceedings against plaintiff's lawyer regarding 
   his failure to file before the statute of limitations ran in an unrelated 
   case was relevant as one of the issues at trial was whether counsel's 
   office practices were so reliable that the notice could be presumed to 
   have been mailed. 
142683P.pdf   05/27/2015  Norma Sorace  v.  United States
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-2683
   U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota - Pierre    
   [PUBLISHED] [White, Author, with Wollman and Colloton, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Federal Tort Claims Act. In action alleging the Rosebud Sioux 
   Tribe's Police Department was negligent in failing to locate and arrest a 
   man before he was involved in drunk driving accident which killed 
   plaintiff's decedents, the district court correctly determined that 
   plaintiff had to demonstrate the existence of an actionable claim under 
   South Dakota law in order to state a FTCA claim; the district court 
   properly dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim for 
   negligence since South Dakota law requires the existence of a special 
   relationship in order to find that a defendant has a duty to prevent 
   misconduct by a third party, and plaintiff failed to allege the existence 
   of a special relationship; further, plaintiff failed to state a claim 
   under the public duty role as the duty, in general, is to the public at 
   large and even where a special duty to particular class of persons is 
   owed, plaintiff failed to allege the reasonable reliance required to 
   create the duty; further, the statutory scheme in place did not 
   demonstrate the intent to protect a particular class of persons required 
   by South Dakota case law; finally the police did not increase the risk of 
   harm or put the decedents in a worse position by their actions; no error 
   in converting the defendant's motion to dismiss into a motion for summary 
   judgment; no error in denying motion to file an amended complaint where 
   plaintiff failed to attach the copy of the amended complaint required by 
   local rule; in any event, amendment would have been futile. 
143017P.pdf   05/27/2015  M. Kathleen McKinney  v.  Southern Bakeries, LLC
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-3017
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Texarkana    
   [PUBLISHED] [Gritzner, Author, with Wollman and Gruender, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Labor Law. The district court erred in entering a preliminary 
   injunction under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 
   as the Board had not demonstrated irreparable injury and using the usual 
   adjudicatory process would not frustrate the purpose of the Act. 
143568U.pdf   05/27/2015  United States  v.  Michael Williams
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-3568
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Bye and Kelly, Circuit 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Sentence was not an abuse of the 
   district court's discretion; claims of ineffective assistance of counsel 
   should be raised in a habeas proceeding.