Filed: Apr. 19, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-3782 _ McBud of Missouri, Inc., * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc., * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: April 14, 2000 Filed: April 19, 2000 _ Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. McBud of Missouri, Inc. (McBud) appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in McBud's diversit
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-3782 _ McBud of Missouri, Inc., * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc., * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: April 14, 2000 Filed: April 19, 2000 _ Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. McBud of Missouri, Inc. (McBud) appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in McBud's diversity..
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 99-3782 ___________ McBud of Missouri, Inc., * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc., * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: April 14, 2000 Filed: April 19, 2000 ___________ Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. McBud of Missouri, Inc. (McBud) appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in McBud's diversity lawsuit. Because this is a diversity action, we review de novo questions of state law. After de novo review of the case in the context of McBud's contentions, we are satisfied the district court correctly interpreted the state statutory provisions at issue and the grant of judgment was proper for the reasons stated by the district court. We also conclude that a comprehensive opinion in this diversity case would lack precedential value. We thus affirm on the basis of the district court's ruling without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R.47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -2-
