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 Judges] 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 conception. 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 General. 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 proceedings. 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 Judges] 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.