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.
131766P.pdf 07/17/2014 BVS, Inc. v. CDW Direct, LLC U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-1766 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids [PUBLISHED] [Bye, Author, with Bright and Smith, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Contracts. Plaintiff's original purchase order constituted an offer and defendant accepted that offer when it sent a purchase order to its subcontractor; the district court erred, however, when it ruled, as a matter of law, that defendant's invoice - sent after offer and acceptance had already created a contract - integrated the contract with respect to terms, such as warranty disclaimers, not included in plaintiff's offer or defendant's acceptance; remanded for further proceedings. 132313P.pdf 07/17/2014 New York Marine & General Ins. v. Continental Cement Company U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-2313 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis [PUBLISHED] [Murphy, Author, with Wollman and Gruender, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Insurance. In this action to determine coverage for a sunken barge where the insurer denied coverage on the ground the insured had failed to disclose the condition of the barge as required by the insured's duty to exercise the utmost good faith, the district court did not err in determining that the doctrine of utmost good faith is such a judicially established federal admiralty rule that it applied to this maritime insurance dispute rather than Missouri state law; defendant waived its appeal of the denial of its motion for judgment as a matter of law on the insurer's utmost good faith defense by failing to file a postverdict motion under Rule 50(b) after the district court denied its Rule 50(a) motion; assuming defendant did not waive its challenge to the jury instruction on the defense of utmost good faith, the instruction adequately and fairly presented the issues, including the question of whether the undisclosed facts were material to calculation of the risk and the terms of the coverage. 132337P.pdf 07/17/2014 United States v. Jeffrey Anderson U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-2337 U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Wollman and Gruender, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. Where defendant transmitted a "morphed image" containing the face of a juvenile superimposed onto the body of an adult female engaged in intercourse, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2252A(a)(2)(A) and 2256(8)(C) are constitutional as applied to defendant's conduct because the government has a compelling interest in protecting minors from the significant harms associated with morphed images and the criminal prohibition is narrowly drawn. 132521P.pdf 07/17/2014 Twin City Pipe Trades Service v. O'Laughlin Plumbing & Heating U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-2521 U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis [PUBLISHED] [Bye, Author, with Wollman and Benton, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Labor law. In an action to collect fringe benefits allegedly owed to union employee benefit funds, the district court erred in finding the employer had unequivocally terminated its participation in a collective bargaining agreement with the funds and was not obligated to contribute fringe benefits for its employees; the employer's continued contributions manifested an intent to abide by and be bound by the CBA and the two letters the employer sent were ineffective to express an unequivocal intent to terminate because they failed to provide clear and explicit notice of intent to terminate; remanded for further proceedings as to the amounts owed. 132589P.pdf 07/17/2014 United States v. Justin Lee Howard U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-2589 U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota - Sioux Falls [PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Colloton and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Where the extortion charged in the case took place on July 16-17, 2012, pre-July 16 conduct could be considered as relevant conduct at sentencing as it was undertaken in preparation for the offense; however, the pre-July 16 conduct cannot give rise to liability for restitution and the only loss incurred during the dates of conviction was the $100 provided by law; as a result, the restitution award must be stricken from the judgment. 133287P.pdf 07/17/2014 Wendy Fiero v. CSG Systems, Inc. U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3287 U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Loken and Beam, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Employment discrimination. Assuming, without deciding that plaintiff established a prima facie case of gender discrimination, her employer offered a legitimate, non-discriminatory justification for terminating her employment which plaintiff failed to show was a pretext for gender discrimination; similarly, she failed to show the stated ground was a pretext for retaliation based on her assertion of her Title VII rights. 133487P.pdf 07/17/2014 Diane Packard v. Falls City Area Jaycees U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3487 U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Beam and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Torts. In a negligence and wrongful death action arising out of a traffic accident, the district court did not err in granting defendant summary judgment as defendant did not have a duty to control the traffic at a public highway intersection near its event at the time the accident occurred. 133494U.pdf 07/17/2014 United States v. Oscar Lee U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3494 U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Bye, Colloton, and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. The district court did not err in sentencing defendant as an armed career criminal. 133543P.pdf 07/17/2014 United States v. John Woolsey, Jr. U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3543 U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - Fargo [PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Murphy and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Prosecution for both being a felon in possession of a firearm and being a felon in possession of ammunition does not violate the bar on multiplicitous prosecutions as the items were acquired at separate times and in separate places, thereby providing two separate "units of prosecution;" in any event, defendant could not show any prejudice as the counts were grouped for sentencing and he received a below-guidelines sentence; constitutional challenge to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(g)(1) rejected. 133726U.pdf 07/17/2014 Sherman Meirovitz v. Anthony Haynes U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3726 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Murphy, Bowman and Benton, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - Habeas. Dismissal of Section 2241 petition was appropriate as plaintiff failed to show the section 2255 remedy was inadequate or ineffective. 133748U.pdf 07/17/2014 Lawrence Coleman v. Larry Crawford U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3748 U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Bye, Colloton and Benton, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - Prisoner civil rights. Plaintiff made a sufficient demonstration of imminent danger and the district court erred in dismissing the complaint preservice under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(g).