J.C. Henry June Henry v. Tri-Servs., Inc., a Taiwan Corp., Dynamic Classics, Ltd. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., a Delaware Corp., Cross v. Tri-Servs., Inc., a Taiwan Corp., Dynamic Classics, Ltd., a Delaware Corp., Cross, 33 F.3d 931 (8th Cir. 1994). · Go Syfert
Search
J.C. Henry June Henry v. Tri-Servs., Inc., a Taiwan Corp., Dynamic Classics, Ltd. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., a Delaware Corp., Cross v. Tri-Servs., Inc., a Taiwan Corp., Dynamic Classics, Ltd., a Delaware Corp., Cross, 33 F.3d 931 (8th Cir. 1994). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
31 citation events (15 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Gauthier v. Roberson (arwd, 2025-08-28)
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994 2010 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gauthier v. Roberson
W.D. Ark. · 2025 · confidence medium
Section 636(c)(1) “requires a clear and unambiguous statement in the record of the affected parties’ consent to the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction.” Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir. 1994) (party who had not yet entered an appearance required to consent).
cited Cited as authority (rule) MORGAN v. NOSS
W.D. Pa. · 2024 · confidence medium
Pa. Jan. 5, 2010) (citing Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 932 (8th Cir. 1994)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Coleman v. Labor & Industry Review Commission (2×)
7th Cir. · 2017 · confidence medium
On the other side, the Eighth Circuit, in Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir. 1994), and our court in Geaney v. Carlson, 776 F.2d 140, 142 (7th Cir. 1985), hold that the magistrate cannot finally dispose of the case, on screening or otherwise, without 'the defendant’s consent.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Baker v. Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahirya
D.D.C. · 2011 · confidence medium
Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir.1994).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Baker v. Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
D.D.C. · 2011 · confidence medium
Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir. 1994).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Acuity v. NORTH CENTRAL VIDEO, LLLP
D.N.D. · 2006 · confidence medium
See LeGear v. Thalacker, 46 F.3d 36, 37 (8th Cir.1995); Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir.1994).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Vicky Hagen v. Sisseton-Wahpeton
8th Cir. · 2000 · confidence medium
Henry v. Tri-Serv., Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir. 1994), because of our disposition of the case on immunity grounds, we need not address the issue or other issues the College raises on appeal. -3- as a Rule 12(b)(6) motion).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Vicky Hagen Colin L. Harris v. Sisseton-Wahpeton Community College
8th Cir. · 2000 · confidence medium
Henry v. Tri-Serv., Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir.1994), because of our disposition of the case on immunity grounds, we need not address the issue or other issues the College raises on appeal. 2 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) James Earl Harris v. Folk Construction (2×)
8th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir. 1994) (J.C.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) James Earl Harris, Husband Luvenia Harris, Wife, Appellants/cross-Appellees v. Folk Construction Company, Appellees/cross-Appellants (2×)
8th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
Henry v. TriServices, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir. 1994)) (I.C.Henry) (rejecting waiver argument and remanding for new trial where parties neither objected nor expressly consented to magistrate judge’s authority in conducting jury trial); see also Gleason v. Secretary of Health and Human Servs., 777 F.2d 1324, 1324-25 (8th Cir.1985) (dismissing appeal from magistrate judge’s ruling on motion for attorneys’ fees for lack of final judgment where there was no “clear and unambiguous statement in the record of the affected parties’ consent to the magistrate judge judge’s jurisdictio…
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Real Property
9th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
Id. at 933.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Real Property
9th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
In short, because Patel lacks standing to bring a Rule 60 motion, he cannot challenge the magistrate judge's jurisdiction to hear his motion. 30 Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir.1994), which Patel cites in support of his argument, is inapposite.
cited Cited as authority (rule) 72 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1665, 69 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 44,486 George Reiter, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Honeywell, Inc. Donna Neff Dennis Madden Thomas Wylie, Appellees/cross-Appellants
8th Cir. · 1997 · confidence medium
Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir.1994) (citing Gleason v. Secretary of Health and Human Servs., 777 F.2d 1324 (8th Cir.1985)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) George Reiter v. Honeywell, Inc.
8th Cir. · 1997 · confidence medium
Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir.1994) (citing Gleason v. Secretary of Health and Human Servs., 777 F.2d 1324 (8th Cir.1985)).
discussed Cited "see" Koch Minerals Sarl v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
D.D.C. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See id. at 932 , 932 n.1 (noting that plaintiffs merely “attempted” to serve the defendant and that the 9 In Manion, the court emphasized the narrow circumstances that might justify a finding of “extraordinary circumstances” stating that “[t]he legislative history of § 636(c)(4) suggests that the District Court’s power to vacate a referral to a Magistrate Judge should be exercised only ‘where it is appropriate to have the trial before an article III judicial officer because of the extraordinary questions of law at issue and judicial decision making is likely to have wide precede…
cited Cited "see" Christopher R. Legear v. John A. Thalacker, Sued as John Thalacker Russell Behrends John Sissel Larry Brimeyer
8th Cir. · 1995 · signal: see · confidence high
See Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir.1994).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." IdeaVillage Products Corp. v. Antiker
S.D.N.Y. · 2021 · signal: see also · confidence low
Jan. 8, 2014); see also Henry v. Tri- Servs., Inc., 33 F.3d 931 , 933 (8th Cir. 1994) (holding that magistrate judge lacked authority to enter default judgment absent consent of defaulting defendant, notwithstanding consent of appearing parties).
cited Cited "see, e.g." H&H Avionics, Inc. v. Virgin Islands Port Authority
virginislands · 2009 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 933 (8th Cir. 1994).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Dahl v. Kanawha Investment Holding Co.
N.D. Iowa · 1995 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Henry v. Tri-Services, Inc., 33 F.3d 931, 932 (8th Cir.1994) (describing entry of default judgment in that case as following entry of default by clerk); Pinaud v. County of Suffolk, 52 F.3d 1139 , 1152 n. 11 (2d Cir.1995) (distinguishing between the first step, entry of default, and the second, entry of default judgment).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
J.C. Henry June Henry
v.
Tri-Services, Inc., a Taiwan Corporation, Dynamic Classics, Ltd. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Cross v. Tri-Services, Inc., a Taiwan Corporation, Dynamic Classics, Ltd., a Delaware Corporation, Cross
93-2907.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Aug 26, 1994.
33 F.3d 931
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

33 F.3d 931

J.C. HENRY; June Henry, Appellees,
v.
TRI-SERVICES, INC., a Taiwan Corporation, Appellant,
Dynamic Classics, Ltd.; Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Defendants.
WAL-MART STORES, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Cross Claimant,
v.
TRI-SERVICES, INC., a Taiwan Corporation, Dynamic Classics,
Ltd., a Delaware Corporation, Cross Defendants.

No. 93-2907.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted May 13, 1994.
Decided Aug. 26, 1994.

Paul Hasty, Jr., Kansas City, MO, argued (Tina A. Smith, on the brief), for appellant.

Stephen R. Soutee, Marionville, MO, argued, for appellees.

Before BOWMAN, Circuit Judge, HEANEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and BEAM, Circuit Judge.

BEAM, Circuit Judge.

[*~931]1

Tri-Services, Inc. (Tri-Services) appeals a magistrate judge's order denying its motion to set aside default judgment. We hold that the magistrate judge lacked authority to enter final judgment because Tri-Services did not consent to have the matter tried to the magistrate judge. We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand for further proceedings in the district court.

I. BACKGROUND

2

J.C. and June Henry filed a diversity products liability complaint in the district court naming Tri-Services, Dynamic Classics, Ltd. (Dynamic Classics) and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Wal-Mart) as defendants. The Henrys twice attempted to serve process on Tri-Services, a Taiwanese corporation with no offices in the United States.[1] Tri-Services, however, did not answer or enter any appearance in the action. Accordingly, the district court ordered the clerk of the court to enter default against Tri-Services in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a).[2]

3

The remaining parties in the action, J.C. and June Henry, Dynamic Classics and Wal-Mart, consented to have a magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings and enter final judgment in the matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(c). The magistrate judge, after a hearing, assessed $1,200,000 in damages against Tri-Services and entered judgment for that amount. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b)(2). Tri-Services subsequently moved the district court to vacate the judgment of default. The magistrate judge denied Tri-Services' motion.

II. DISCUSSION

4

A magistrate judge's decision is final and directly appealable to this court if it is issued under the authority of 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(c). Section 636(c) requires a clear and unambiguous statement in the record of the affected parties' consent to the magistrate judge's jurisdiction. Gleason v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 777 F.2d 1324 (8th Cir.1985). Tri-Services had not yet entered an appearance in this action when the remaining parties agreed to have final judgment determined by a magistrate judge. The record contains no clear statement that Tri-Services ratified this agreement. We conclude, therefore, that Tri-Services did not waive its right to have judgment entered and to have its motion to vacate heard by an Article III judge. Thus, there is no valid final order. Accordingly, we must vacate the magistrate judge's order and dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

III. CONCLUSION

[*~932]5

We remand this case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion and without prejudice to the filing of a notice of appeal from any final, appealable order entered by the district court.

1

Tri-Services claims that for certain reasons not relevant to our present decision it did not receive actual notice of the lawsuit until after default judgment had been entered against it

2

Rule 55(a) states:

When a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party's default.

Although the rule does not require an order of the court for the clerk to enter default, the notice and affidavits showing failure to plead or defend were, apparently, submitted to the district judge who, in turn, directed the clerk to enter default as provided in Rule 55(a).