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.
133502P.pdf   07/01/2015  United States  v.  James Fry
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-3502
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul    
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Bright and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. No presumption of vindictiveness is warranted 
   in the class of cases where a defendant who is convicted after trial 
   alleges that "similarly situated" defendants who pleaded guilty were 
   sentenced to lesser punishment; the district court explicitly considered 
   the issue of unwarranted sentencing disparities at defendant's sentencing; 
   the district court's explanation for its sentencing decision was not 
   plainly inadequate; 220-month sentence, which represented a substantial 
   downward variance from defendant's 1440-month advisory guidelines 
   sentence, was not substantively unreasonable; any disparities between 
   defendant's sentence and those of his co-conspirators were warranted by 
   their dissimilar situations, such as cooperation and acceptance of 
   responsibility, the seriousness of defendant's conduct, his prior record, 
   his efforts to obstruct the investigation and his role in the offense. 
   Judge Bright, dissenting. 
  
141055P.pdf   07/01/2015  Bowles Sub Parcel A, LLC  v.  CW Capital Asset Mgmt. LLC
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1055
                          and No:  14-1056
                          and No:  14-1060
                          and No:  14-1061
                          and No:  14-1064
                          and No:  14-1065
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Bankruptcy. Bankruptcy court did not err in determining that 
   a default interest provision in the loan agreement at issue was valid 
   liquidated-damages provision under Minnesota law. 
  
141269P.pdf   07/01/2015  Gregory Scott Taylor  v.  United States
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1269
   U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - Fargo    
   [PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Gruender and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Prisoner case - Habeas. The district court erred in finding that a 
   proposed amendment to Taylor's timely-filed habeas petition, filed 10 
   months after the limitations period had expired, related back to his 
   original claims; the claim was, therefore, time barred, and the district 
   court erred in granting relief on the claim; remanded with instruction to 
   reimpose Taylor's sentence. Judge Kelly, concurring. 
  
141407P.pdf   07/01/2015  Bryant Lewis  v.  Enerquest Oil and Gas
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1407
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - El Dorado    
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Wollman and Benton, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Oil and Gas. In an action to cancel oil and gas leases on the 
   ground the defendant lessees breached implied covenants in the leases to 
   develop the oil and gas deposits, the district court correctly determined 
   that lessors had not provided defendants with the required notice and 
   opportunity to cure the breach before bringing suit to cancel the leases. 
  
142272P.pdf   07/01/2015  Elsie Glickert  v.  The Loop Trolley Trans., etc.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-2272
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Murphy, Circuit Judge, and Brooks, 
   District Judge] 
   Civil case - Civil Procedure. In action challenging the construction and 
   operation of a trolley-car system in St. Louis and University City, 
   Missouri, the district court did not err in dismissing plaintiffs' due 
   process and equal protection claims without affording them an opportunity 
   to supply more particularized allegations to establish their standing as 
   they did not submit a motion to amend or a proposed amendment and did not 
   indicate what a proposed amended pleading might have contained; nor did 
   the court err in finding plaintiffs lacked standing to assert equal 
   protection and due process claims because these claims were not an 
   assertion of their own legal rights; a fourth plaintiff who actually owned 
   property in the proposed trolley development district had publication 
   notice of a related law suit in state court and was bound by it; claim 
   that the notice was constitutionally defective was not raised in the 
   district court and the argument was waived. 
  
143285U.pdf   07/01/2015  Joe Bell, Jr.  v.  Jeremy Andrews
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-3285
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Bye and Kelly, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Prisoner case - Prisoner civil rights. The district court did not err in 
   denying defendant's motion for summary judgment based on qualified 
   immunity on plaintiff's claim that his reassignment to the hoe squad after 
   he successfully contested a disciplinary charge initiated by defendant was 
   a retaliatory assignment in violation of his clearly established 
   constitutional rights. 
  
143821U.pdf   07/01/2015  John Roach  v.  Myers Property Rentals
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-3821
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Harrison    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Bye and Kelly, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Civil case - Civil rights. Dismissal for failure to state a claim affirmed 
   without comment.