Missouri Lawyers Media Missouri legal news and public notices
Civil Practice
Federal Jurisdiction
Removal
Failure To Warn
Where plaintiffs, who claimed they suffered damage to their ears from improper earplug usage, sued the manufacturer in state court for failure to warn and the manufacturer removed the action to federal court and then brought a challenge to the district court’s remand orders, the manufacturer failed to establish that it was acting under a federal office or agency in developing warnings and instructions for the earplugs for commercial earplugs, so the remand of the claims for plaintiffs who acquired the earplugs in a commercial marketplace is affirmed, but the manufacturer made the requisite showing that it complied with government directions to provide military contractors with earplugs without instructions, so the order remanding the claims brought by plaintiffs who acquired the earplugs through the military is reversed.
Judgment is affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.
Graves v. 3M Company (MLW No.77493/Case No. 20-1635 – 13 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Loken, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, Tunheim, J. (Benjamin Winters Hulse, Minneapolis, MN argued for appellant) (Daniel E. Gustafson, Minneapolis, MN argued for appellee).
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/10/201635P.pdf
Federal Tort Claims Act
Adverse Judgment
Where appellant challenged an adverse summary judgment after a bench trial in her action brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act, there was no basis for reversal.
Judgment is affirmed.
Rogers v. U.S. (MLW No. 77507/Case No. 21-1455 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas.
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/10/211455U.pdf
Civil Rights
Arrest
Excessive Force
Where appellant challenged an adverse grant of summary judgment, the appellant’s allegations created a genuine issue of material fact as to whether an officer used excessive force in arresting him, so summary judgment was improper.
Judgment is reversed; remanded.
Pearson v. St. Louis City Police Department (MLW No. 77495/Case No. 20-2768 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri.
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/10/202768U.pdf
Criminal Law
Post-Conviction Relief
Effectiveness Of Counsel
Severance
Where a defendant argued that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when his trial attorney withdrew a motion to sever two murder charges, the attorney’s decision to withdraw the motion was based on an unreasonable interpretation of the facts, but he did not show prejudice to be entitled to habeas relief, and the trial court’s decision to deny severance was reasonable, and the defendant could not show a reasonable probability of a different outcome in the case, and the evidence was convincingly incriminating for both murders, so the judgment is affirmed.
Judgment is affirmed.
Donelson v. Steele (MLW No. 77506/Case No. 20-1094 – 27 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Smith, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Fleissig, J. (Kathryn Parish, St. Louis, MO argued for appellant) (Gregory Michael Goodwin, Jefferson City, MO argued for appellee).
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/10/201094P.pdf
Sentencing
Upward Variance
Where a defendant in a drug case challenged his sentencing, the district court did not err in finding that the defendant engaged in violent conduct warranting an upward variance, and the judgment is affirmed.
Judgment is affirmed.
U.S. v. Harris (MLW No. 77494/Case No. 20-2674 – 4 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas.
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/10/202674U.pdf
