8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Digest: June 28, 2023

Bankruptcy

U.S. Trustee

Seizure of Assets; Allowance of Claims

Debtor appealed the bankruptcy appellate panel’s decision to affirm the bankruptcy court’s denial of debtor’s motions and its decision not to reopen the bankruptcy case. Debtor accused the U.S. Trustee of improperly seizing assets and allowing fraudulent claims in his bankruptcy case.

Where a right to payment did not need to be reduced to judgment or otherwise undisputed to qualify as a claim, the U.S. Trustee’s actions were not in error.

Judgment is affirmed.

In re: Reichel (MLW No. 80087/Case No. 23-1002 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit.

Civil Rights

§1983

State Taxes; Tax Injunction Act

Plaintiff appealed the dismissal of his §1983 lawsuit relating to state taxes.

Where plaintiff’s claims were barred by the Tax Injunction Act, the district court correctly dismissed the case.

Judgment is affirmed.

McNeil v. Hutchinson (MLW No. 80088/Case No. 23-1319 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Rudofsky, J.

§1983

Unlawful Detention; Judicial Immunity

Defendant appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss plaintiff’s §1983 complaint on grounds of judicial immunity. Plaintiff and his ex-wife moved with their children, who were aspiring actors, to California. When plaintiff’s ex-wife became dissatisfied with sharing custody, she filed a motion for sole custody in Missouri, which was heard by defendant. Defendant oversaw negotiations for an agreement for the children to live with plaintiff’s ex-wife for a month. When defendant observed the children protesting to their mother, he personally put them in jail until they agreed to go with their mother. Defendant again jailed the children after their mother filed a contempt motion.

Where defendant personally jailed plaintiff’s children, that action did not constitute a “judicial act” for which defendant was entitled to immunity, although he had immunity to issue an arrest warrant despite losing jurisdiction over the custody case.

Judgment is affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.

Rockett v. Eighmy (MLW No. 80083/Case No. 21-3903 – 11 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Stras, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, Harpool, J.

Inmate Action

Medical Treatment;

Spider Bite

Where an inmate challenged a grant of summary judgment for jail officials who allegedly delayed medical treatment for a spider bite, no material facts were in dispute, and the judgment is affirmed.

Judgment is affirmed.

Raper v. Gober (MLW No. 80091/Case No. 23-1331 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas.

Qualified Immunity

County Liability

Where plaintiff, who was accused of stealing from a tenant, brought an action against a local prosecutor and the county, the finding that the prosecutor was entitled to qualified immunity is affirmed, and the plaintiff did not establish an unconstitutional act by the prosecutor to support county liability.

Judgement is affirmed.

Hutchcroft-Darling v. Boecker (MLW No. 80089/Case No. 22-2118 – 5 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Northern District of Iowa.

Criminal Law

Child Pornography

Post-Conviction Motions; Compassionate Release

Defendant was convicted on multiple child pornography offenses. On a prior appeal, the court vacated one count of conviction, and on remand defendant was sentenced to 300 months on the remaining counts. Defendant appealed the denial of his post-conviction motions, while the government cross-appealed the grant of defendant’s motion for compassionate release.

Where rehabilitation alone could not constitute an extraordinary and compelling reason for compassionate release and defendant failed to present individualized evidence related to his risk of severe illness from COVID-19, the district court abused its discretion in granting defendant’s motion.

Judgment is vacated and remanded in part and affirmed in part.

U.S. v. DeFoggi (MLW No. 80084/Case Nos. 22-2327 & 22-2394 – 5 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska.

Sentencing

Consecutive Sentences; Substantive Reasonableness

Where a defendant challenged his sentence after pleading guilty to charges that included carjacking resulting in death, the district court had the discretion to impose consecutive sentences on what were two separate offenses, and the court’s error in determining that the consecutive sentencing was mandatory was harmless since the court would have done the same anyway based on the facts of the case.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Jones (MLW No. 80090/Case No. 22-2158 – 6 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Loken, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Clark Sr., J.

Text Messages

Drug Offenses; Sufficiency Of Evidence

Where a defendant challenged his convictions for drug-related charges, the district court’s admission of text messages between the defendant and a woman to whom he sold drugs and who later died was not erroneous because the evidence was sufficient to show that the phone was in substantially the same condition as when the crime was committed, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Moore (MLW No. 80115/Case No. 22-2733 – 19 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Shepherd, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota, Schreier, J.

Wire Fraud

Sufficiency of Evidence; Criminal Intent

Defendant appealed the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal on wire fraud, Social Security fraud, and theft of government money charges, after he was discovered to be self-employed while receiving Social Security Disability benefits. Defendant argued that the evidence was insufficient to prove that he had the requisite criminal intent. Defendant also challenged the district court’s imposition of restitution.

Where the jury was free to disbelieve defendant’s justifications for his failure to report his self-employment, that employment was sufficient evidence to prove criminal intent to defraud, but there was insufficient evidence to prove when defendant became ineligible for benefits to calculate the amount of restitution.

Judgment is affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part.

U.S. v. Workman (MLW No. 80082/Case No. 21-3839 – 7 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Wollman, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, Bough, J.

Domestic Relations

Property Settlement Agreement

Obligation to Leave Inheritance; Standing

Defendant appealed the judgment of the district court. Plaintiffs filed suit against defendant, their stepmother, to adjudicate their rights to property owned by their late father and defendant. Plaintiffs argued that their father breached his property settlement agreement with their mother, which obligated plaintiffs’ father to leave half of his estate to plaintiffs. Plaintiffs’ father created no will for his estate, and defendant took sole possession of his property and titled it in her name. The district court concluded that plaintiffs’ father breached the PSA and imposed a constructive trust to equitably divide the property. On appeal, defendant argued that plaintiffs lacked standing and that the district court lacked jurisdiction and committed numerous substantive errors.

Where the district court did not take possession of the disputed property and plaintiffs and defendant were not former spouses, the probate and domestic relations exceptions to federal subject matter jurisdiction did not apply because plaintiffs’ claim arose from contract law. Imposition of a constructive trust was an appropriate remedy for plaintiffs’ father’s breach of his contractual duties.

Judgment is affirmed.

Crain v. Crain (MLW No. 80086/Case No. 22-1674 – 18 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Shepherd, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Arkansas, Brooks, J.

Immigration

Removal

Humanitarian Parole; Continuance

Where a petitioner and her children sought review of an order affirming a removal decision, arguing that proceedings should be terminated because she was not removable since her humanitarian parole would not expire for two months, the petitioner was not prejudiced by the continuation of her case rather than its termination, and the Board of Immigration Appeals articulated the appropriate standard for evaluating past persecution and did not err in deciding that threats from a gang did not rise to that level.

Petition denied.

Brizuela v. Garland (MLW No. 80114/Case No. 22-1738 – 9 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Shepherd, J.) Petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Torts

Products Liability

Wrongful Death; Evidence of Causation

Plaintiff appealed the grant of summary judgment for defendant. Plaintiff and her husband purchased a ladder from defendant. Years later, plaintiff’s husband was found dead near the ladder with injuries consistent with a fall. Plaintiff sued defendant, claiming that a defect in the ladder caused her husband’s death. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of defendant, ruling that plaintiff had failed to present sufficient evidence of causation.

Although plaintiff presented evidence of possible defects or dangers in the ladder, she failed to show that these defects caused her husband’s fall, especially where her expert admitted that he could not identify defects in materials, assembly, or workmanship that caused or contributed to the fall.

Judgment is affirmed.

Hunt v. Home Depot, Inc. (MLW No. 80085/Case No. 22-2437 – 7 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Smith, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Miller, J.