Bankruptcy

Attorney Fees

Reasonableness

Bifurcated Arrangement

Where a consumer bankruptcy attorney appealed an order of the bankruptcy court granting the motion of the trustee to determine the reasonableness of his attorney fees for work associated with filing Chapter 7 cases using a bifurcated arrangement, the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in finding that additional fees charged based on debtors’ decision to pay fees in post-petition installments were excessive and should be returned.

Judgment is affirmed.

Ridings v. Casamatta (MLW No. 76904/Case No. 20-6023 – 8 pages) (U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Ridgway, J.) Appealed from U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District of Missouri.

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/206023P.pdf

Civil Practice

Adverse Summary Judgment

Civil Rights Action

Where appellant challenged the district court’s adverse grant of summary judgment in his civil rights action, the district court did not err in granting judgment for the defendants.

Judgment is affirmed.

Simmermaker v. Cedar County Sheriff’s Department (MLW No. 76898/Case No. 20-2817 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Northern District of Iowa.

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/202817U.pdf

Arbitration

Claim Preclusion

Where plaintiff sought to reopen a case in Missouri after arbitration in Florida, after adding the defendant’s parent company to its arbitration claims, the district court properly applied Florida law to hold that the plaintiff’s claims met the requirements for claim preclusion and were therefore barred.

Judgment is affirmed.

Daredevil, Inc. v. ZTE Corporation (MLW No. 76896/Case No. 19-3769 – 14 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Smith, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Sippel, J. (S. Jay Dobbs, Chesterfield, argued for appellant) (Laura Eve Besvinick, Miami, argued for appellee; David M Slaby, Britton L St. Onge and Frank T. Spano appeared on the brief).

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/193769P.pdf

Federal Tort Claims Act

Pro Se Complaint

Where appellant challenged the dismissal of his pro se complaint raising a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the district court did not err in dismissing the case.

Judgment is affirmed.

Lambros v. U.S. (MLW No. 76901/Case No. 20-3672 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota.

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/203672U.pdf

Personal Jurisdiction

Venue

Where plaintiffs sought damages from defendant, a Singapore citizen, for his part in convincing them to buy fraudulent securities, the defendant actively recruited investors to invest in a North Dakota company and brokered the sale of interests in North Dakota property and securities, traveled, received commissions and communicated with the state, so his contacts were numerous and central to the alleged scheme, thus personal jurisdiction was proper, and venue was also proper, and the judgment is affirmed because the court declines to consider the doctrine of forum non conveniens, which was not raised in the district court, and summary judgment for the plaintiffs is affirmed.

Judgment is affirmed.

Kaliannan v. Liang (MLW No. 76895/Case No. 19-1427 – 12 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Shepherd, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of North Dakota, Hovland, J. (Michael James Confusione, Mullica Hill, New Jersey, argued for appellant) (Brian O. Marty, West Des Moines, Iowa, argued for appellee).

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/191427P.pdf

Civil Rights

Title IX

Sexual Harassment

Jury Trial

Where the family of a student who was sexually abused by a teacher sued the school district and individuals including the teacher and a principal, the principal did not have actual notice that the teacher was abusing the child, so he and the district were entitled to summary judgment on the Title IX claims, and the defendants were also entitled to qualified immunity for claims arising from an intentional tort, and the appellate court holds that there is no right to a jury trial on the issue of damages following the entry of default judgment.

Judgment is affirmed.

KD v. Douglas County School District No. 001 (MLW No. 76892/Case No. 20-1772 – 15 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Shepherd, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska, Smith Camp, J. (David Domina, Omaha, Nebraska, argued for appellant) (Jill Robb Ackerman and Clarence E. Mock, Oakland, Nebraska, argued for appellees).

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/201772P.pdf

Criminal Law

Guilty Plea

Motion To Withdraw

Where a defendant argued that the district court erred by denying him leave to withdraw his guilty plea in drug case, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into the guilty plea, and the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw, and the sentence was substantively reasonable, so the judgment is affirmed.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Bustillos (MLW No. 76903/Case No. 20-2520 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri.

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/202520U.pdf

Restitution

Waiver

Where a defendant challenged an order that he pay restitution to a teen victim whom he sexually abused and financially exploited after helping the victim enter the country on a fraudulent visa, the defendant waived two of his arguments by taking the opposite position on the question before the district court, and the judgment is affirmed because the defendant’s conduct caused the victim’s losses.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Sukhtipyaroge (MLW No. 76889/Case No. 19-2799 – 7 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Stras, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, Wright, J. (James E. Ostgard II, Minneapolis, argued for appellant) (Laura M. Provinzino, Minneapolis, argued for appellee).

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/192799P.pdf

Sentencing

ACCA

Violent Felony

Where a defendant challenged his sentence after pleading guilty to a count of being a felon in unlawful possession of ammunition, the district court did not err in finding that the defendant’s prior convictions for aggravated battery of a peace officer and for causing willful injury qualified as violent felony convictions under the Armed Career Criminal Act’s force clause.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Clark (MLW No. 76902/Case No. 20-1506 – 7 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Loken, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Southern District of Iowa.

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/201506P.pdf

Sentencing

Appeal Waiver

Where a defendant challenged a sentence imposed after he pled guilty to threatening a federal officer, the defendant’s plea agreement included an appeal waiver that was valid, enforceable and applicable to the challenge, so the appeal is dismissed.

Dismissed.

U.S. v. Wilson (MLW No. 76900/Case No. 20-3474 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri.

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/203474U.pdf

Sentencing

Calculation Of Range

Where a defendant challenged his sentence in an unlawful possession case, the district court did not make a mistake in calculating the range under the sentencing guidelines, and the court sufficiently considered the statutory sentencing factors, so the judgment is affirmed.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Welton (MLW No.76894/Case No. 20-3165 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. Court District Court, Northern District of Iowa.

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/203165U.pdf

Sentencing

Career Offender

Where a defendant challenged his sentence in a cocaine case, the district court did not err in applying a career-offender enhancement because the defendant’s Iowa convictions for attempted murder qualified as a crime of violence and his drug conviction constituted a qualifying controlled substance offense, and the sentence was not substantively unreasonable.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Brown (MLW No. 76897/Case No. 20-1512 – 7 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Southern District of Iowa. (Diane Z. Helphrey, Davenport, Iowa, argued for appellant) (William Reiser Ripley, Davenport, Iowa, argued for appellee).

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/201512P.pdf

Sentencing
Downward Variance

Where a defendant challenged the sentence imposed after he pled guilty to sexually exploiting a minor, the sentence was substantively reasonable, and the district court sufficiently considered the statutory sentencing factors and did not err in not varying downward further.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Ordeas-Lucas (MLW No. 76899/Case No. 20-3465 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Arkansas.

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/203465U.pdf

Employer – Employee

Exclusive Bargaining

First Amendment

Where a tenured professor sued her university employer, the board of trustees and a labor organization for allegedly violating her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights, claiming that designating the labor organization as her exclusive bargaining representative compelled her to speak through and associate with an entity with which she disagrees, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment to the defendants, and there was no error in denying her request for leave to amend her complaint.

Judgment is affirmed.

Uradnik v. Inter Faculty Organization (MLW No. 76890/Case No. 19-3749 – 7 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Grasz, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, Magnuson, J. (Richard Bryan Raile, Washington, D.C., argued for appellant) (Jacob Campion, St Paul, Minnesota, and Brendan D. Cummins, Minneapolis, for appellees).

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/193749P.pdf

Insurance

Underinsured Motorist Benefits

Offset Provision

Where a plaintiff who was injured in an auto accident sought underinsured motorist benefits from the insurer and the insurer only paid half of the policy due to an offset provision in the policy, the insurance contract was unambiguous, and the district court erred in finding that the offset provision did not apply, so the grant of summary judgment to the plaintiff is reversed.

Judgment is reversed.

Micheel v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company (MLW No. 76893/Case No. 20-1800 – 4 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Kobes, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Clark Sr., J. (Aaron Daniel Van Oort, Minneapolis, argued for appellant; Robert Joseph Wulff, Jeffrey P. Justman and Martin J. Demoret appeared on the brief) (Matthew J. Sauter, St. Louis, argued for appellee).

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/201800P.pdf

Labor

Union Trustees

Impartial Umpire

Where employer-appointed trustees challenged the district court’s dismissal of their complaint seeking the appointment of an impartial umpire to resolve a deadlock on a motion brought by one of the employer-appointed trustees at a meeting with union-appointed trustees, the motion was invalid under the act’s equal representation requirement, and the dispute was not the kind for which the trustees could seek the appointment of an umpire.

Judgment is affirmed.

Gillick v. Elliott (MLW No. 76891/Case No. 20-1686 – 9 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Shepherd, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Hamilton, J. (James N. Foster Jr., St Louis, argued for appellant; Rex P. Fennessey appeared on the brief) (James Singer, St Louis, argued for appellee; Matthew B. Leppert appeared on the brief).

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/06/201686P.pdf