8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Digest: March 7.

Byline: Minnesota Lawyer

Civil Opinions

Administrative

Social Security Disability Benefits

Denial of Application; Sufficiency of Evidence

Plaintiff applied for Social Security disability benefits, alleging mild intellectual disability, low education, slow learning ability and memory problems. Although an ALJ found plaintiff had three severe impairments, the ALJ concluded that none of the impairments alone or in combination was severe enough to qualify for disability benefits and that plaintiff's residual functional capacity allowed him to perform light, unskilled work that existed in significant numbers.

Where opposing expert testimony did not support finding that plaintiff had an intellectual disability and indicated that his mental disabilities were controllable with medication, ALJ did not err in crediting one conflicting expert over another to find that plaintiff's disability was not severe enough to qualify for benefits. Judgment is affirmed.

18-2514 Bagwell v. Comm'r, Social Security Admin., appealed from the Eastern District of Arkansas, Grasz, J.

Bankruptcy

Bifurcation of Secured Claim

Anti-Modification Provision

Debtors filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy; their plan proposed that appellant's secured claim in debtor's manufactured home would be bifurcated into secured and unsecured parts. The bankruptcy court overruled appellant's objection, ruling that the anti-modification provision of the bankruptcy code did not apply to appellant's claim.

Where debtors owned the manufactured home while appellant owned the lot on which it sat and charged debtors a monthly fee to lease and the home could be removed without substantial loss of value, there was no evidence of intent to make the home a permanent fixture and thus the anti-modification did not apply because the home was personal rather than real property.

Judgment is affirmed.

18-2098 The Paddock LLC v. Bennett, appealed from Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Benton, J.

Civil Rights

Civil Commitment; Gender Discrimination

Where male patients, who were civilly committed for sexual offenses, argued that they were being discriminated against on the basis of gender in violation of the equal protection clause, the grant of summary judgment to the defendants is affirmed because there was no finding of selective prosecution, and no evidence that the plaintiffs were personally damaged by the alleged discrimination. Judgment is affirmed.

17-3332 Taft v. Branstad, appealed from U.S. District Court, Northern District of Iowa, per curiam

Civil Rights

Conditions of Confinement; False Arrest

Where a plaintiff challenged the dismissal of her claims including false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, the judgment is affirmed because the plaintiff failed to provide record evidence to question the defendants' asserted reasons for her confinement, and summary judgment for the defendants was proper on the claim regarding the conditions of confinement. Judgment is affirmed.

17-3274 Shimota v. Wegner, appealed from the District of Minnesota, per curiam.

Civil Rights

Inmate Action; Prison Remedies; Failure to Exhaust

Where an inmate sued prison official and health care providers claiming his rights were violated when the defendants failed to comply with his health care directives, the judgment is affirmed because the District Court properly found that the inmate failed to exhaust applicable prison remedies, and he failed to meaningfully argue any preserved federal claim against the hospital defendants.

Judgment is affirmed.

18-2305 Schreiber v. Ludwick, appealed from the Southern District of Iowa, per curiam.

Civil Rights

Race Discrimination; Disparate Treatment; Zoning Application

Plaintiff filed suit against defendant after the city denied plaintiff's zoning application to open a beauty salon in a residential neighborhood. Plaintiff alleged the city discriminated against her on the basis of race and treated her differently from other salon operators. The District Court granted the city summary judgment after finding plaintiff failed to show the city treated her less favorably or denied her application based on her race.

Where plaintiff failed to present evidence that other salon operators were allegedly treated more favorably than plaintiff, were comparable to plaintiff or that the denial of her zoning application was based on racial discrimination, plaintiff's discrimination and "class of one" claims failed. Judgment is affirmed.

17-1761 Mensie v. City of Little Rock, appealed from the Eastern District of Arkansas, Grasz, J.

Civil Rights

Revocation of Supervised Release

Imprisonment; Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Defendant appealed from the revocation of his supervised release and the District Court's imposition of a guidelines-range term of imprisonment. Among other issues, defendant alleged that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at his revocation hearing.

Where defendant could not raise an ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal and none of the District Court's rulings were clearly erroneous...