Latest 2 Cases: United States v. Snow (Criminal Law), Ellingsworth v. Vermeer Manufacturing Co. (Personal Injury)

A Win for Equal Pay: The Third Circuit Court of Appeals Upholds A Law Designed to Address Wage Gap

JOANNA L. GROSSMAN

SMU Dedman School of Law professor Joanna L. Grossman comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upholding a local law designed to address the wage gap. Grossman describes the landscape of equal pay law and the efforts some states and localities have made to address the inequity.

Read More

United States v. Snow

Docket: 18-3577

Opinion Date: February 10, 2020

Judge: Stras

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute cocaine base. The court held that the district court did not clearly err in determining that defendant's prior Iowa drug convictions increased his statutory maximum and made him a career offender. The court also held that the district court did not err in making defendant's federal sentence consecutive to any term of imprisonment Iowa might impose for violating the conditions of his parole.

Ellingsworth v. Vermeer Manufacturing Co.

Docket: 18-3587

Opinion Date: February 10, 2020

Judge: Kobes

Areas of Law: Personal Injury, Products Liability

Plaintiff filed suit against Vermeer in Missouri state court, alleging that he was injured while operating a Vermeer wood chipper. After Vermeer successfully removed to federal court, the district court denied plaintiff's motions to remand and for leave to amend, granting summary judgment to Vermeer. The Eighth Circuit affirmed, holding that the district court did not improperly remove the case where plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the only nondiverse party that was in the case at the time. Furthermore, even if the district court did not err, plaintiff could not get the relief he sought in light of Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 64 (1996). The court also held that plaintiff failed to sufficiently establish good cause and the district court was well within its discretion to deny the motion for leave to amend his complaint to add a claim of agency liability against Vermeer. Finally, the court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment on the products liability and failure to warn claims. In this case, the record clearly established that Vermeer did not manufacture the winch attachment that injured plaintiff.