Vernon Ball v. Zales Corp. Bailey, Banks & Biddle, 141 F.3d 1167 (8th Cir. 1998). · Go Syfert
Vernon Ball v. Zales Corp. Bailey, Banks & Biddle, 141 F.3d 1167 (8th Cir. 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
40 citation events (12 in the last 25 years) across 10 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Cherunda Lynn Fox v. United States Postal Service (mied, 2026-01-07)
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998 2012 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cherunda Lynn Fox v. United States Postal Service
E.D. Mich. · 2026 · confidence medium
See Levasseur v. United States, 543 F.3d 23, 24 (1st Cir. 2008); Benigni v. United States, 141 F.3d 1167, 1167 (8th Cir. 1998); C.D. of NYC, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 157 F. App’x 428, 429 (2d Cir. 2006); Lopez v. U.S. Postal Regul.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Konan v. USPS
5th Cir. · 2024 · confidence medium
See Levasseur v. U.S. Postal Serv., 543 F.3d 23, 23-24 (1st Cir. 2008) (determining that the postal-matter exception applied where an employee stole campaign flyers and refused to deliver them until after the election); C.D. of NYC, Inc. v. USPS, 157 F. App’x 428, 429 (2d Cir. 2005) (determining the postal-matter exception applied where a diamond store employee conspired with USPS employees to steal jewelry); Benigni v. United States, 141 F.3d 1167, 1167 (8th Cir. 1998) (determining the postal- matter exception applied where USPS intentionally withheld his mail from home delivery). 3 With re…
cited Cited "see" Chicago Truck Drivers v. BROTHER. OF LABOR LEASING
E.D. Mo. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chicago Truck Drivers etc. v. Brotherhood Labor Leasing, et al., 950 F.Supp. 1454 (E.D.Mo. 1996), aff'd, 141 F.3d 1167 (8th Cir.1998).
cited Cited "see" Chicago Truck Drivers, Helpers & Warehouse Workers Union Pension Fund v. Brotherhood Labor Leasing
8th Cir. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chicago Truck Drivers, Helpers & Warehouse Workers Union Pension Fund v. Brotherhood Labor Leasing, 141 F.3d 1167 , 1998 WL 121398 (8th Cir.1998) (table).
cited Cited "see" Chicago Truck Drivers, Helpers & Warehouse Workers Union Pension Fund v. Brotherhood Labor Leasing
8th Cir. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chicago Truck Drivers, Helpers & Warehouse Workers Union Pension Fund v. Brotherhood Labor Leasing, 141 F.3d 1167 , 1998 WL 121398 (8th Cir.1998) (table).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Lavasseur v. US Postal Service
D.N.H. · 2007 · signal: see also · confidence low
Co. v. United States. 378 F.2d 812, 814-15 (2d Cir. 1967) (affirming dismissal of loss-of-mail claims against USPS because postal exception barred suit for mail that "was stolen while it was in the normal flow of mail"); see also Beniqni v. United States. 141 F.3d 1167 (8th Cir. 1998), cert. denied 525 U.S. 897 (1998) (affirming dismissal of loss-of-mail claims against United States because postal exception barred suit for intentionally withheld mail that never reached intended recipient).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Vernon Ball
v.
Zales Corp. Bailey, Banks & Biddle
97-2978.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Apr 2, 1998.
141 F.3d 1167
Unpublished

141 F.3d 1167

NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that they are not precedent and generally should not be cited unless relevant to establishing the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, the law of the case, or if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue and no published opinion would serve as well.
Vernon Ball, Appellant,
v.
Zales Corp.; Bailey, Banks & Biddle, Appellees.

No. 97-2978.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: March 19, 1998
Filed: April 2, 1998

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

Vernon Ball appeals from the district court's[1] order dismissing his employment discrimination action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 37(b) and 41(b). After careful review of the record and the parties' briefs, we deny Ball's motion for appointment of counsel, and we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action for the reasons it stated. See First Gen. Resources Co. v. Elton Leather Corp., 958 F.2d 204, 206 (8th Cir.1992) (per curiam) (Rule 41(b) standard of review); Avionic Co. v. General Dynamics Corp., 957 F.2d 555, 558 (8th Cir.1992) (Rule 37(b) standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

The HONORABLE E. RICHARD WEBBER, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri