Carl McMichael v. United States, 856 F.2d 1024 (8th Cir. 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
Carl McMichael v. United States, 856 F.2d 1024 (8th Cir. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Graham v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Graham) (paed, 1991-08-23)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Graham v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Graham)
E.D. Pa. · 1991 · confidence medium
“Ordinarily, a procedural change in the law ... is not given retroactive application.” McMichael v. United States, 856 F.2d 1024, 1025 (8th Cir.1988).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Minority Employees of the Tennessee Department of Employment Security, Inc. v. State of Tennessee, Department of Employment Security (2×) also: Cited "see"
6th Cir. · 1990 · confidence medium
We, therefore, cannot agree with McMichael v. United States, 856 F.2d 1024, 1025 (8th Cir.1988), that Torres announced a “procedural change in the law.” 7 Similarly, we reject the argument that the prior panels should have permitted an amendment to the notice of appeal.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Minority Employees Of The Tennessee Department Of Employment Security, Incorporated v. State Of Tennessee (2×) also: Cited "see"
6th Cir. · 1990 · confidence medium
We, therefore, cannot agree with McMichael v. United States, 856 F.2d 1024, 1025 (8th Cir.1988), that Torres announced a "procedural change in the law." 7 49 Similarly, we reject the argument that the prior panels should have permitted an amendment to the notice of appeal.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Angel David Santos-Martinez v. Victor M. Soto-Santiago, Etc.
1st Cir. · 1989 · confidence medium
McMichael v. United States, 856 F.2d 1024, 1025 (8th Cir.1988) (declining to apply Torres retroactively).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Carl McMICHAEL, Et Al., Appellee,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant
87-1634 to 87-1640, 87-1707.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Aug 25, 1988.
856 F.2d 1024
Ralph Johnson, Washington, D.C., for U.S., Bettina Brownstein, Little Rock, Ark., for Highland Resources., Bernard Whetstone, Little Rock, Ark., for Mitchell, Moody, Kelly and Stancile., James Bruce McMath, Little Rock, Ark., for McMichael, Bartlett, Madison and Harrison.
Gibson, Bright, Magill.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published

ORDER

Before JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge, BRIGHT, Senior Circuit Judge, and MAGILL, Circuit Judge.

The motion of the United States to vacate the judgment in favor of plaintiff-ap-pellee Billy Harrison is before the court. The motion is based on the failure of the notice of appeal to include Harrison’s name and the issuance of the recent opinion of the Supreme Court in Torres v. Oakland Scavenger Company, et al., — U.S. —, 108 S.Ct. 2405, 101 L.Ed.2d 285 (1988). This issue was presented to the court before. See Harrison v. United States, 715 F.2d 1311 (8th Cir.1983). Pursuant to the opinion issued at that time, an order was entered that the notice of appeal be amended to include Billy Harrison. Materials have been filed with the court revealing that the parties have stipulated the amount of damages of some of the appellees, expressly stating that the government’s right to appeal a liability issue was not waived. Ordinarily a procedural change in the law, such as announced in Torres, is not given retroactive application. Particularly under the circumstances presented in this case, we decline to do so. The motion to vacate the judgment as to plaintiff-appellee Billy Harrison is denied.