District Court, E.D. Missouri — appointed by Calvin Coolidge
St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. v. Lippincott
District Court, E.D. Missouri · 2001-07-31
In this case, an insurance company sought a declaratory judgment regarding its obligations under a homeowners policy and umbrella endorsement for a claim arising from the insureds' sale of their home. The underlying state court action resulted in a judgment against the insureds for negligent misrepresentation after they concealed structural defects, awarding the buyers damages for repair costs and diminished market value. The district court granted summary judgment to the insurer, concluding that the policy did not provide coverage. The court reasoned that the buyers' losses constituted economic harm rather than "property damage" as defined in either the main policy (damage to someone else's property) or the umbrella endorsement (damage to tangible property or loss of its use), since the misrepresentations did not cause physical damage to the property.
propertytorts & liability
Snyder v. Saberliner Corp.
District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1999-12-14 · cited 4×
In Snyder v. Saberliner Corp., the plaintiff, a female manager, sued her employer under Title VII alleging sex discrimination through unequal terms of employment such as denied raises and vacation, intimidation, probation, and demotion, plus retaliation for complaining to management and wrongful discharge. The court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment on all claims. It reasoned that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination or retaliation because she did not show she was meeting legitimate job expectations or that any adverse actions were causally linked to protected activity, and the record lacked evidence of pretext in the employer's performance-based decisions. The court further found no actual demotion or discharge occurred, and the plaintiff had not exhausted administrative prerequisites for a constructive discharge claim.
civil rightslabor & employment
Parker v. Apfel
District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1998-01-16 · cited 1×
This case involves Gloria Parker's application for Social Security disability insurance benefits under Title II, alleging disability from bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, thoracic outlet syndrome, post-cervical discectomy and fusion, and hypertension. After initial denial and a hearing, an ALJ found that Parker was not disabled because she could perform the full range of sedentary work despite her impairments, and the Appeals Council denied review. The district court reviewed the record under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and granted the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment, concluding that substantial evidence supported the ALJ's findings on residual functional capacity and ability to perform other work. The court also denied Parker's motion to supplement the record with later medical evidence, as it did not relate to her condition at the time of the ALJ's decision.
labor & employment
Higgins v. Callahan
District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1997-09-30 · cited 1×
In Higgins v. Callahan, the plaintiff sought judicial review of the Social Security Administration's denial of his applications for Title II disability insurance benefits and Title XVI supplemental security income, claiming disability due to emphysema, bronchitis, arthritis, and related conditions. The district court granted the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiff's, thereby affirming the ALJ's decision that the plaintiff was not disabled. The court found that the ALJ properly assessed the plaintiff's credibility, residual functional capacity, and daily activities based on substantial evidence in the medical record, including examination findings showing only mild to moderate impairments and the ability to perform a range of light work. It further held that the ALJ's hypothetical questions to the vocational expert adequately incorporated the claimant's accepted limitations and that the resulting conclusion of available jobs was supported by the record.
labor & employment
Bryan v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.
District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1997-07-03 · cited 6×
This case was a wrongful death action brought by Freda Bryan against Norfolk & Western Railway Company after her husband was killed when his truck collided with a train at the Massas Creek Road crossing in Jonesburg, Missouri. The plaintiff alleged the crossing was extraordinarily hazardous due to obstructed views and lack of automatic gates or signals, and that the railway was negligent in failing to sound proper warnings, operating at excessive speed, failing to keep a lookout, and not installing adequate protective devices. The court granted the railway's motion for summary judgment, dismissing all claims against it and the third-party defendants. It reasoned that federal regulations under 23 C.F.R. § 646.214 and 49 C.F.R. § 213.9 preempted the claims regarding warning devices and speed where federal determinations had been made about the crossing, evidence established compliance with whistle requirements, and no genuine issues of material fact existed on the remaining claims.
torts & liabilityfederal powerprocedure
United States v. CERTAIN LAND, ETC.
District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1942-07-06 · cited 6×
This case involved the federal government's condemnation of 33 acres of farmland in St. Charles County, Missouri, for the Weldon Springs Ordnance Plant under the Act of September 9, 1940. The landowners had entered an option contract to sell the property for $4,500, which included provisions for a condemnation suit with a consent verdict at that price if title issues arose, but the government later challenged the contract's validity in the proceedings and sought an award determined by commissioners. The court held that the option contract was valid and binding, so the landowners' compensation would be fixed at the contract price rather than determined through commissioners. The reasoning centered on the absence of fraud, misrepresentation, or unconscionability in the contract formation, the government's authority and acceptance of the agreement during a national defense emergency, and precedent such as Danforth v. United States requiring enforcement of such price-fixing agreements.
propertyfederal power