Dakota, MN & Eastern R.R. v. Kevin Schieffer
Filing
OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Michael J. Melloy and Steven M. Colloton AUTHORING JUDGE:James B. Loken (PUBLISHED) [4019194] [12-1807]
United States Court of Appeals
For The Eighth Circuit
Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse
111 South 10th Street, Room 24.329
St. Louis, Missouri 63102
VOICE (314) 244-2400
FAX (314) 244-2780
www.ca8.uscourts.gov
Michael E. Gans
Clerk of Court
March 28, 2013
Mr. Kevin Martin Decker
Mr. Timothy Robert Thornton
BRIGGS & MORGAN
2200 IDS Center
80 S. Eighth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402-0000
RE: 12-1807 Dakota, MN & Eastern R.R. v. Kevin Schieffer
Dear Counsel:
The court has issued an opinion in this case. Judgment has been entered in accordance
with the opinion. The opinion will be released to the public at 10:00a.m. today. Please hold the
opinion in confidence until that time.
Please review Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and the Eighth Circuit Rules on postsubmission procedure to ensure that any contemplated filing is timely and in compliance with the
rules. Note particularly that petitions for rehearing and petitions for rehearing en banc must be
received in the clerk's office within 14 days of the date of the entry of judgment. Counsel-filed
petitions must be filed electronically in CM/ECF. Paper copies are not required. No grace period
for mailing is allowed, and the date of the postmark is irrelevant for pro-se-filed petitions. Any
petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc which is not received within the 14 day
period for filing permitted by FRAP 40 may be denied as untimely.
Michael E. Gans
Clerk of Court
YML
Enclosure(s)
cc:
Mr. Joseph A. Haas
Ms. Dana Van Beek Palmer
Mr. R. Alan Peterson
Mr. Steven W. Sanford
District Court/Agency Case Number(s): 4:10-cv-04037-RAL
Appellate Case: 12-1807
Page: 1
Date Filed: 03/28/2013 Entry ID: 4019194
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?