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.
111232P.pdf   08/29/2014  United States  v.  Abby Rae Cole
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  11-1232
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul    
   [PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Murphy and Bye, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. For the court's prior opinion in the matter, 
   see United States v. Cole, 721 F.3d 1016) (8th Cir. 2013). On remand, the 
   district court provided an adequate explanation for its decision to grant 
   a downward variance and sentence defendant to probation; sentence was 
   substantively reasonable. 
  
123754P.pdf   08/29/2014  United States  v.  Jeffrey Cole Bennett
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-3754
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul    
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Loken and Beam, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. In fraud schemes in which defendant Clayton 
   paid defendants Bennett and Hogeland for services never provided Clayton's 
   employer or paid kickbacks for business opportunities, the convictions 
   against Clayton must be vacated in light of his death while the appeal was 
   pending; with respect to defendant Bennett's appeal, the district court 
   did not err in denying his motions to dismiss the mail-fraud and 
   mail-fraud-conspiracy counts on statute of limitations grounds; the 
   evidence was sufficient to support Bennett's conviction on the mail fraud 
   charge; Alleyne challenge to Bennett's sentence rejected as the facts 
   found by the district court did not alter the statutory maximum or minimum 
   sentence he faced; Clayton's death does not require reversal of Bennett's 
   convictions; no err in denying Hogeland's motion to sever her trial from 
   Clayton and Bennett's. Judge Beam, concurring in part and dissenting in 
   part. 
  
131026P.pdf   08/29/2014  Michael Reed  v.  Malone's Mechanical, Inc.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-1026
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Ft. Smith    
   [PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Wollman and Loken, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Personal injury. Challenges to jury instructions rejected; 
   district court did not abuse its discretion by commenting on one 
   instruction; no error in admitting evidence regarding other contractors 
   doing similar work on the premises and the safety measures they took while 
   performing overhead work; reasonable minds could disagree as to whether 
   the project consulting manager had a duty to plaintiff or defendant prior 
   to or on the day of the accident, and the district court did not err in 
   denying plaintiff's motion for judgment as a matter of law that the 
   project manager owed no duty. 
  
131654P.pdf   08/29/2014  USA ex rel Susan Thayer  v.  Planned Parenthood
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-1654
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines    
   [PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Colloton and Gruender, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - False Claims Act. In qui tam action alleging Planned 
   Parenthood submitted false or fraudulent claims for Medicaid 
   reimbursement, the district court erred in dismissing certain of 
   plaintiff's claims as she had pled sufficiently particularized facts to 
   support her allegations that defendant violated the False Claims Act by 
   filing claims for (1) unnecessary quantities of birth control pills, (2) 
   birth control bills dispensed without a prescription, (3) abortion-related 
   services, and (4) the full amount of services where a portion or all of 
   the charges had been paid by "'donations' Planned Parenthood coerced from 
   patients;" however, plaintiff's allegations that Planned Parenthood 
   violated the Act by causing other hospitals to unknowingly submit claims 
   for abortion-related services and by upcoding were not sufficiently pled 
   to satisfy Rule 9(b) and were properly dismissed; the courts' decision 
   that certain claims were sufficiently pled to meet Rule 9(b)'s 
   requirements should not be read as in any way expressing a view as to 
   whether they survive Planned Parenthood's Rule 12(b)(6) arguments, which 
   the district court did not address in light of its ruling that the 
   complaint was insufficient under Rule 9(b). 
  
141079U.pdf   08/29/2014  Santiago Alonso-Guico  v.  Eric H. Holder, Jr.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1079
   Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Bye, Smith and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Petition for Review - Immigration. Omaha Immigration Court. The decision 
   to deny withholding of removal was supported by substantial evidence, and 
   the petition for review is denied. 
  
141248U.pdf   08/29/2014  Georgina Stephens  v.  Federal National Mortgage
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1248
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Civil case - Foreclosure. Case was properly removed to federal court based 
   upon diversity jurisdiction; the district court did not err in dismissing 
   plaintiffs' claims. 
  
141410U.pdf   08/29/2014  Carl Turner  v.  Ray Hobbs
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1410
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Prisoner case - Prisoner civil rights. District court did not err in 
   granting defendants summary judgment on plaintiff's Section 1983 claims.